In this riveting edition of the UFO Insight Podcast, our dedicated host, Marcus Lowth, delves deep into the enigmatic world of alleged top-secret bases and facilities around the globe, closely tied to UFOs and extraterrestrial beings. With nearly two decades of dedicated research into UFOs, the paranormal, and ancient mysteries, Marcus brings to light fascinating insights and theories, all while encouraging listeners to draw their own conclusions.
The episode embarks on an exploration of these clandestine establishments rumored to exist in some of the most unexpected and inhospitable locations. Some, it is suggested, nestle deep within the heart of the world’s most iconic mountain ranges, a perfect camouflage for activities beyond our understanding. Marcus imparts captivating theories and accounts that hint at the presence of otherworldly activities tucked away within these rocky terrains.
As the discussion transitions, the focus shifts to the intriguing possibility of secret bases submerged in the profound depths of the world’s seas and oceans. These underwater bases pose an even greater enigma than their terrestrial counterparts. The accounts of unidentified crafts emerging and disappearing into the aquatic depths challenge our perceptions of what could be lurking beneath the waves.
The narrative then introduces the chilling testimonies of alleged abductees. These individuals narrate their extraordinary experiences of being whisked away to these hidden bases during their inexplicable encounters. The intricate details shared by them about these underwater bases are as enthralling as they are mysterious.
Lastly, Marcus navigates us to the frosty expanses of Antarctica. The icy continent is a place of enigma and conspiracy theories, one that supposedly conceals a myriad of secrets related to UFOs and alien life. The mysteries of Antarctica’s connection to alien phenomena are unraveled, sparking thought-provoking questions about what might lie beneath the ice.
In every segment of this episode, Marcus presents his meticulously researched theories and invites listeners to engage in their own exploration of truth. Remember, the aim of the UFO Insight Podcast is not to sway your belief but to provide you with information to help you make up your own mind. In the realm of UFOs and the paranormal, every story is a piece of the puzzle. Are you ready to put it together? Tune in, and let’s unravel these mysteries together.
As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.
On this electrifying episode of the UFO Insight Podcast, our host and seasoned researcher, Marcus Lowth, delves deep into the clandestine abyss of alleged UFO projects and secret space missions. As we embark on this interstellar journey, we’re reminded of the need for discernment, but also the fascinating allure these tales hold.
We begin our exploration with Project Moon Dust, an alleged operation by the United States military said to be responsible for the recovery of extraterrestrial vehicles that have crashed on Earth. Unveiling the enigmatic shroud around this project, we probe into the question: Did our military forces really retrieve otherworldly technology, and if so, how has this influenced our scientific advancement?
Next, we venture into the whispers of Project Serpo. Purportedly an interstellar exchange program, the stories assert that human astronauts were sent to an extraterrestrial planet as a part of a secret agreement with alien entities. This narrative beckons us to ponder on the unimaginable: Could there have been an undercover space mission, perhaps a result of reverse-engineered alien technology?
We then touch upon the intriguing narratives surrounding Project Sigma. Allegedly, this covert operation was dedicated to establishing communication with extraterrestrial civilizations. If true, this ushers in profound queries about the nature of these exchanges. What messages were exchanged and what effects have they had on our understanding of the universe?
Lastly, we turn our gaze towards Project Redsun. This project, as per the claims, was aimed at establishing a human presence on Mars with the assistance of unidentified entities. We delve into the conjecture: Was a secret Martian base built as a result of interstellar collaboration?
Each of these projects, whether actual or imagined, opens up a universe of questions and mysteries. Marcus Lowth, with his near two decades of research into UFOs and the paranormal, masterfully navigates through these cosmic tales, shedding light on their credibility and their implications on our understanding of reality itself.
Tune into this episode of the UFO Insight Podcast for a voyage into the enigmatic and the extraordinary. Whether you’re a seasoned UFO enthusiast or simply curious about the unknown, this episode will surely ignite your imagination and expand your cosmic perspective. Brace yourself for an enlightening journey that ventures into the shadows of the clandestine cosmos, illuminating the intriguing and thought-provoking.
As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.
“In the event sufficient scientific data were ever obtained, that a UAP encounter can only be explained by extraterrestrial origin, we are committed to working with our interagency partners at NASA to appropriately inform U.S. Government’s leadership of its findings.”
~Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick – Director of AARO
~~~
If you like what you see on my blog, my Twitter and YouTube Channel and appreciate the time and effort, here are links to my Patreon, Pay Pal and Venmo. I appreciate any and all support. Without that support, I would struggle to do this as much as I do.
Former intelligence and defense contractor, Michael Via, joined me on April 23rd and we analyzed the hearing.
~~~
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand – D-New York – (KG): “The hearing will come to order. I’d first like to thank our witness, Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, for testifying here and in today’s earlier closed session. And for his long and distinguished career, both in the intelligence community and in the Department of Defense. Dr. Kirkpatrick is the director of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, or AARO. Congress established this office, in law, to get to the bottom of the very serious problem of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomenon (That’s not a typo. KG said “phenomenon.” ~Joe) or UAP. Dr. Kirkpatrick has a very difficult mission. While we have made progress, there remains a stigma attached to these phenomenon. There is a vast and complex citizen engagement, and there’s also very challenging scientific and technical hurdles. So we appreciate the willingness of Dr. Kirkpatrick to lean in on this issue and the work that he has accomplished thus far. And we look forward to both his opening statement and his presentation of examples of the work AARO has done.
In late 2017, media reports surfaced about activity set in motion by the late long-serving Majority Leader, Senator Harry Reid, more than a decade ago. We learned that there was strong evidence of advanced technology reflected in the features and performance characteristics of many objects observed by our highly-trained service members operating top-of-the-line, military equipment. We learned that for at least the past eight years, military pilots frequently encountered unknown objects in controlled airspace off both the East and West Coasts across the continental United States, in test and training areas, and ranges. We don’t know where they come from, who made them, or how they operate. As former Deputy Secretary of Defense, David Norquist, observed, had any of these objects had the label, Made in China, there would be an uproar in the government and media. There would be no stone unturned and no effort spared to find out what we were dealing with. We can look at the recent incursion of the unidentified, PRC (People’s Republic of China) high-altitude balloon as an example. And because of the UFO stigma, the response has been irresponsibly anemic and slow.
Congress established AARO. We made it clear that we expect vigorous action. We added very substantial, initial funding for the office. But despite our best efforts, the President’s budget for Fiscal Years 2023 and 2024, requested only enough funding to defray the operating expenses of AARO. It included almost no funds to sustain the critical research and development necessary to support a serious investigation. It took a letter to Secretary Austin from Senator Rubio and me, and 14 other senators, to get the office temporary relief for the current fiscal year.
Senator Gillibrand asks Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin if he will ensure the Pentagon’s All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) will be fully funded during today’s Department of Defense budget request hearing.#ufotwitter#ufo#uap h/t: @Akam1129pic.twitter.com/DeHpamZQkD
KG: In this hearing, I tend to probe a series of specific issues. In the recent incidents where multiple objects were shot down over North America, it seemed that Pentagon leadership did not turn to [the] AARO office to play a leading role in advising the combatant commander. We need to know whether this will continue, we need to know whether the leadership in DoD will bring AARO into the decision-making process in a visible way, and we need to know what role AARO will play in interagency coordination after the NSC Working Group disbands.
In the fiscal year 2023 National Defense and Intelligence Authorization Act, Congress established a direct-reporting chain from the AARO director to the Deputy Secretary of Defense. The role of the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security is limited to providing administrative support. We need to know how this direction is being implemented. UAP are frequently observed flying [at] extremely high or very-low speeds and come in various sizes and shapes. During the recent shoot downs over North America, DoD disclosed that filters on radar systems were adjusted to allow for detection and tracking of diverse sets of objects for the first time. While opening the aperture can overload the real time, analytic process, we cannot keep turning a blind eye to surveillance data that is critical to detecting and tracking UAP. We need to know whether Dr. Kirkpatrick can achieve the necessary control over sensor filters,and the storage and access to raw, surveillance data to find UAP anomalies.
Finally, one of the tasks Congress set for AARO is serving as an open door for witnesses of UAP events, or participants in government activities related to UAPs, to come forward securely and disclose what they know without fear of retribution for any possible violations of previously signed non-disclosure-agreements. Congress mandated that AARO set up a publicly-discoverable and accessible process for safe disclosure. While we know that AARO has already conducted a significant number of interviews, many referred by Congress, we need to set up a public process and we need to know where that effort stands. With that, I’d like to turn to Senator Ernst for her opening statement.
We have no evidence of E.T. 👽
George Knapp and Jeremy Corbell share their thoughts about the big statement that Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick said during the UAP hearing last week.
24 Witnesses: A) Doesn't consider their testimony to be evidence B) Not credible evidence C) AARO hasn't… pic.twitter.com/jwLsKnpwUK
Senator Joni Ernst – R-Iowa – (JE): Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you Dr. Kirkpatrick for your testimony today. I’ll keep these remarks very brief so that we have maximum time for your briefing. The recent downing of the Chinese surveillance balloon, and three other objects, underscores the need for domain awareness. Adversaries like China and Russia are working to hold U.S. interests, including our homeland, at risk. That’s why your testimony is so important. And I so look forward to a progress update on the establishment of your office. As members know, your office evolved from the Navy-led, Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force, to the All-domain Anomalous Resolution Office known as AARO. Dr. Kirkpatrick, your extensive background in science and technology, research and development, and space, makes you well suited to discuss these emerging challenges. My priority is that we understand the full range of threats posed by our adversaries in all domains. That is what the Joint Force needs to be prepared to fight and win in defense of our nation. This committee needs to know about Chinese or Russian advanced-technology programs to exploit our vulnerabilities, and it needs to know whether your office, along with the IC, has detected potential Chinese or Russian capabilities to surveilor attack us. Finally, we need to ensure efficient, interagency coordination. Multiple elements of the DoD and IC own a piece of this mission. To add value, AARO’s efforts cannot be redundant with others. Thank you again, we look forward to your testimony.
KG: Dr. Kirkpatrick, you can give your testimony.
Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick (SK): Thank you, Chairwoman Gillibrand, Ranking Member Ernst, and distinguished members of the Subcommittee and Congress. It is a privilege to be here today to testify on the Department of Defense’s efforts to address Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena.
First, I want to thank Congress for its extensive and continued partnership as the Department works to better understand and respond to UAP in an effort to minimize technical and intelligence surprise. Unidentified objects in any domain pose potential risks to safety and security, particularly for military personnel and capabilities. Congress and DoD agree that UAP cannot remain unexamined or unaddressed.
We are grateful for sustained, congressional engagement on this issue, which paved the way for DoD’s establishment of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office in July of last year. Though AARO is still a young office, the spotlight on UAP in recent months underscores the importance of its work and the need for UAP to be taken seriously as a matter of national security. All leadership that I’ve had the pleasure of working with, whether DoD, IC, DOE, civil, scientific or industrial, view Congress as a critical partner in this endeavor.
AARO has accomplished much in the 9 months since it was established. The AARO team of more than three dozen experts is organized around four functional areas: operations, scientific research, integrated analysis, and strategic communications. In the nine months since AARO’s establishment, we have taken important steps to improve UAP data collection, standardize the Department’s UAP internal reporting requirements, and implement a framework for rigorous scientific and intelligence analysis, allowing us to resolve cases in a systematic and prioritized manner. Meanwhile, consistent with legislative direction, AARO is also carefully reviewing and researching the U.S. Government’s UAP-related historical record.
AARO is leading a focused effort to better characterize, understand, and attribute UAP, with priority given to UAP reports by DoD and IC personnel in or near areas of national security importance. DoD fully appreciates the eagerness from many quarters, especially here in Congress and in the American public, to quickly resolve every UAP encountered across the globe, from the distant past through today.
It is important to note, however, that AARO is the culmination of decades of DoD, Intelligence Community, and congressionally-directed efforts to successfully resolve UAP encountered, first and foremost, by U.S. military personnel, specifically Navy and Air Force pilots.
The law establishing AARO is ambitious, and it will take time to realize the full mission. We cannot answer decades of questions about UAP all at once, but we must begin somewhere. While I assure you that AARO will follow scientific evidence wherever it leads, I ask for your patience as DoD first prioritizes the safety and security of our military personnel and installations, in all domains.
After all, UAP encountered first by highly-capable DoD and IC platforms, featuring the nation’s most advanced sensors, are those UAP most likely to be successfully resolved by my office, assuming the data can be collected. If AARO succeeds in first improving the ability of military personnel to quickly and confidently resolve UAP they encounter, I believe that in time, we will have greatly advanced the capability of the entire United States Government, including its civilian agencies, to resolve UAP. However, it would be naive to believe that the resolution of all UAP can be solely accomplished by the DoD and IC alone. We will need to prioritize collection and leverage authorities for monitoring all domains within the continental United States. AARO’s ultimate success will require partnerships with the interagency, industry partners, academia and the scientific community, as well as the public.
AARO is partnering with the Services, Intelligence Community, DOE and across the U.S. government to tap into the resources of the interagency. The UAP challenge is more an operational and scientific issue than it is an intelligence issue. As such, we are working with industry, academia, and the scientific community, which bring their own resources, ideas, and expertise to this challenging problem set. Robust collaboration and peer-review across a broad range of partners will promote greater objectivity and transparency in the study of UAP.
I want to underscore today that only a very small percentage of UAP reports display signatures that could reasonably be described as ‘anomalous.’ The majority of unidentified objects reported to AARO demonstrate mundane characteristics of balloons, unmanned aerial systems, clutter, natural phenomena, or other readily explainable sources. While a large number of cases in our holdings remain technically unresolved, this is primarily due to a lack of data associated with these cases. Without sufficient data, we are unable to reach defendable conclusions that meet the high scientific standards we set for resolution, and I will not close a case that we cannot defend the conclusions of.
I recognize that this answer is unsatisfying to those who, in good faith, assume that what they see with their eyes, with their cameras, and with their radars is incontrovertible evidence of extraordinary characteristics and performance. Yet, time and again, with sufficient scientific-quality data, it is fact that UAP often, but not always, resolve into readily-explainable sources. Humans are subject to deception and illusions, sensors to unexpected responses and malfunctions, and in some cases, intentional interference. Getting to the handful of cases that pass this level of scrutiny is the mission of AARO.
That is not to say that UAP, once resolved, are no longer of national security interest, however. On the contrary, learning that a UAP isn’t of exotic origin but is instead, just a quadcopter or a balloon, leads to the question of who is operating that quadcopter, and to what purpose. The answers to those questions will inform potential national security or law-enforcement responses.
AARO is a member of the Department’s support to the administration’s “Tiger Team” effort to deal with stratospheric objects such as the PRC High-Altitude Balloon (HAB). When previously unknown objects are successfully identified, it is AARO’s role to quickly and efficiently hand off such readily-explainable objects to the Intelligence, law-enforcement or operational-safety communities for further analysis and appropriate action. In other words, AARO’s mission is to turn UAP into SEP: Somebody Else’s Problem.
The U.S. Government, the DoD and the IC, in particular, has tremendous capabilities to deal with those encountered objects. In the wake of the PRC HAB event, the interagency is working to better integrate and share information to address identifiable stratospheric objects, but that is not AARO’s lane.
Meanwhile, for the few cases in all domains, space, air and sea, that do demonstrate potentially anomalous characteristics, AARO exists to help the DoD, IC, and interagency resolve those anomalous cases. In doing so, AARO is approaching these cases with the highest level of objectivity and analytic rigor. This includes physically testing and employing modeling and simulation to validate our analyses and underlying theories, then peer reviewing those results within the U.S. Government, industry partners, and appropriately-cleared academic institutions, before reaching any conclusions.
I should also state clearly, for the record, that in our research, AARO has found no credible evidence, thus far, of extraterrestrial activity, off-world technology, or objects that defy the known laws of physics. In the event sufficient scientific data were ever obtained, that a UAP encounter can only be explained by extraterrestrial origin, we are committed to working with our interagency partners at NASA to appropriately inform U.S. Government’s leadership of its findings. For those few cases that have leaked to the public previously, and subsequently commented on by the U.S. Government, I encourage those who hold alternative theories or views to submit your research to credible, peer-reviewed scientific journals. AARO is working very hard to do the same. That is how science works, not by blog or social media.
We know that there is tremendous public interest in UAP and a desire for answers from AARO. By its very nature, the UAP challenge has, for decades, lent itself to mystery, sensationalism, and even conspiracy. For that reason, AARO remains committed to transparency, accountability, and to sharing as much with the American public as we can, consistent with our obligation to protect not only intelligence sources and methods, but U.S. and Allied capabilities. However, AARO’s work will take time if we are committed to doing it right. It means adhering to the scientific method and the highest standards of research integrity. It means being methodical and scrupulous. It means withholding judgment in favor of evidence. It means following the data where it leads, wherever it leads. It means establishing scientific, peer-reviewed, theoretical underpinnings of observed data. And AARO is committed to all of those standards.
I’m proud of AARO’s progress over the last nine months. Much remains to be done, but the hard work is under way. Thank you for your continued support. And before we turn to questions, I’m gonna walk you through some of our analytical trends and a couple of cases that we’ve prepared.
[the_ad_placement id=”content”]
So one of the things that AARO does is high-integrity analysis, as I’ve said. This chart represents the trend analysis of all the cases in AARO’s holdings to date.
I’ll break it down since it’s small and hard to see:
SK: What you’ll see on the left is a histogram of all of our reported sightings as a function of altitude. So, most of our sightings occur in the 15 to 25,000 foot range. And that is ultimately because that’s where a lot of our aircraft are.
~~~
SK: On the far right, upper corner, you’ll see a breakout of the morphologies of all of the UAP that are reported. Over half, about 52% of what’s been reported to us, are round or spheres. The rest of those breakout into all kinds of different other shapes. The gray box (Ambiguous Sensor Contact) is…essentially there is no data on what its shape is. Either it wasn’t reported or the sensor did not collect it.
~~~
SK: The bottom map is a heat map of all reporting areas across the globe that we have available to us. What you’ll notice is that there is a heavy, what we call, collection bias, both in altitude and in geographic location. That’s where all of our sensors exist. That’s where our training ranges are, that’s where our operational ranges are, that’s where all of our platforms are.
~~~
SK: In the middle, what we have done is reduce the most typically-reported UAP characteristics to these fields. Mostly round, mostly one to four meters. White, silver, translucent, metallic. 10,000 to 30,000 feet, with apparent velocities from stationary to Mach 2. No thermal exhausts are usually detected. We get intermittent radar returns, we get intermittent radio returns, and we get intermittent thermal signatures. That’s what we’re looking for, and trying to understand what that is.
~~~
SK: Next slide. So I’m going to walk you through two cases that we’ve declassified recently. This first one is an MQ-9 in the Middle East, observing that blow up, which is an apparent spherical object via EO (electro-optical) sensors. Those are not IR (Infrared).
~~~
SK: If you want to go ahead and click that and play it.
2022 – MQ-9: Sphere/Orb – No Audio
~~~
2022 – MQ-9: Sphere/Orb – With Kirkpatrick Audio
~~~
SK: You’ll see it come through the top of the screen, there it goes, and then the camera will slew to follow it. You’ll see it pop in and out of the field of view there. This is essentially all of the data we have associated with this event from some years ago. It is going to be virtually impossible to fully identify that, just based off of that video. Now what we can do and what we are doing is keeping that as part of that group of 52% to see: What are the similarities, what are the trends across all these, and do we see these in a particular distribution? Do they all behave the same or not? As we get more data, we will be able to go back and look at these in a fuller context. How are we gonna get more data? We are working with the Joint Staff to issue guidance to all the services and commands, that will then establish: What are the reporting requirements, the timeliness, and all of the data that is required to be delivered to us and retained from all the associated sensors? That historically hasn’t been the case, and it’s been happenstance that data has been collected.
Next slide. This particular event, South Asia, MQ-9, looking at another MQ-9. And what’s highlighted there in that red circle is an object that flies through the screen.
~~~
SK: Unlike the previous one, this one actually shows some really interesting things that everyone thought was truly anomalous to start with. First of all, it’s a high-speed object that’s flying in the field of regard of two MQ-9s. Second, it appears to have this trail behind it, right? Which, at first blush, you would think, that looks like a propulsion trail. In reality, if you want to play the first slide, we’ll show you what that looks like in real time. The first video.
2023 – MQ-9: Commuter Jet – No Audio
~~~
2023 – MQ-9: Commuter Jet – With Kirkpatrick Audio
~~~
SK: So we’re looking at that, there it goes. Why don’t you play it again, and then pause it halfway through. Right there. Alright, if you might be able to see that trail there behind it. That’s actually not a real trail, that is a sensor artifact. Each one of those little blobs is actually a representation of the object as it’s moving through. And later in the video, as the as the camera slews, that trail actually follows the direction of the camera, not the direction of the object.
2023 – MQ-9: The Trail = A Sensor Artifact
~~~
2023 – MQ-9: Close-up of The Trail = A Sensor Artifact
~~~
2023 – MQ-9: Close-up of Commuter Jet
~~~
SK: We pulled these apart frame by frame, we were able to demonstrate that that is essentially a readout, overlap of the image. It’s a shadow image, right? It’s not real. Further, if you later follow this all the way to end, it starts to resolve itself into that blob that’s in that picture on the top right. And if you squint, it looks like an aircraft…because it actually turns out to be an aircraft. Go ahead and put that on. So you’ll see the tail sort of pop out there. And so what you’re looking at, in the infrared, this is the heat signature off of the engines of a commuter aircraft that happened to be flying in the vicinity of where those two MQ-9s were at.
Why am I showing you this? So the first one that I showed you, we don’t have resolved yet, right? That is an unresolved case we are still studying. This one, we can resolve. But this is the kind of data that we have to work with and the type of analysis that we have to do, which can be quite extensive when you have to pull these apart, frame by frame. Further, we’re now matching all of this with the models of all of those imaging sensors, so that I can say, “I can recreate this, I can actually show how the sensor is going to respond.” All of these sensors don’t necessarily respond the way ya think they do. Especially out in the world and in the field. And I believe that’s all I have. And I will open it up for your questions.
[the_ad id=”1724″]
KG: Thank you so much, Dr. Kirkpatrick. Can you just give us some raw numbers of how many UAPs you’ve analyzed? How many have been resolved, and sort of in what buckets? And then how many are still left to be resolved? Just an update from your January public report, where it was 366 or something, and about 150 were balloons, and about two dozen were drones. You know, just give us an update, if you have one.
SK: Sure. So, as of this week, we are tracking over a total of 650 cases. Now, the report in January basically said about half of the ones at that time, about 150, were likely balloon-like or something like that. That doesn’t mean they’re resolved.
KG: Oh, I see.
SK: Let me walk everyone through what our analytic process looks like. We have, essentially, a five-step process, right? So we have, we get our cases, and all the data. We create a case for that event. My team does a preliminary scrub of all of those cases as they come in, just to sort out: Do we have any information that says this is in one of those likely categories? It’s likely a balloon, it’s likely a bird, it’s likely some other object. Or, we don’t know. Then we prioritize those based off of where they are. Are they attached to a national-security area? Does it show some anomalous phenomenology that is of interest? If it’s just a spherical thing that’s floating around with the wind, and it has no payload on it, that’s gonna be less important than something that has a payload on it, which will be less important than something that’s maneuvering, right?
So there’s sort of a hierarchy of just binning the priorities, because we can’t do all of them at once. Once we do that, and we prioritize them, and we take that package of data, in that case…and I have set up two teams. Think of this as a Red Team/Blue Team, or a competitive analysis. I have an intelligence-community team, made up of intelligence analysts, and I have an S & T team (science and technology) made up of scientists and engineers. And the people that actually build a lot of these sensors are physicists, because, you know, if you’re a physicist, you can do anything, right? And…but they’re not associated with the Intel Community, they’re not intel officers. They look at this through the lens of the sensor, of what the data says. We give that package to both teams. And the Intelligence Community is gonna look at it through the lens of the intelligence record, and what they assess, and their intel tradecraft, which they have very specific rules and regulations on how they do. The scientific community, technical community, is gonna look at it through the lens of: What is the data telling me? What is the sensor doing? What would I expect a sensor response to be? And back that out. Those two groups give us their answers.
We then adjudicate. If they agree, then I am more likely to close that case, if they agree on what it is. If they disagree, we will have an adjudication. We’ll bring them together, we’ll take a look at the differences. We’ll adjudicate: Why do you say one thing and you say another? We will then come to a case recommendation [and] that will get written up by my team. That then goes to a Senior Technical Advisory Group, which is outside of all of those people, made up of senior, technical folks and intel analysts and operators from retired, out of the Community. And they essentially peer review what that case recommendation is. They write their recommendations and that comes back to me, I review it, we make a determination, and I’ll sign off one way or the other. And then that will go out as the case determination. Once we have an approved web portal to hang the unclassified stuff, we will downgrade and declassify things and put it out there. In the meantime, we’re putting a lot of these on our classified web portal, where we can then collaborate with the rest of the Community so they can see what’s going on.
In a nutshell, that is the process, right? So, because of that…that takes time. So of those, over 650, you know, we’ve prioritized about half of them to be of anomalous, interesting value. And now we have to go through those and go, “How much do I have actual data for?” Because if all I have is [an] operator report that says, “I saw X, Y or Z, and my assessment is A, B, or C,” that’s not really sufficient. That’s a good place to start, but I have to have data. I have to have radar data, I have to have EO (electro-optical) data, I have to have thermal data, I have to have overhead data, and we need to look at all that.
Now, from a big-picture perspective, I still have…that’s all still very valuable data, and we’re looking at applying a lot of things, new tools, analytic tools, like natural-language processing, so I can go across all of those reports and look for commonalities. How many of them are being described as round, spherical objects that are maneuvering. How many of them are not maneuvering? How many of them seem to have a plume to it, or node? That’s also going to be very valuable to give us more of a global picture and a trends analysis of: What are we seeing? And help us get to the determination.
So, go back to your question, ma’am, we have…this next quarterly report will be coming out here pretty soon. Our next annual report, you all have given us…moved it up to June/July. We’re gonna be having that done about that timeframe and we’ll be combining a whole number of reports into that one. I think we’re currently sitting at around – if I remember correctly – we’re around twenty to thirtyish, or about halfway through that analytic process. A handful of them have made it all the way out to the other side, gone through peer review, we’ve got case-closure reports done and signed. We’re gonna get faster as we get more people on board and we get more of the Community tools to automate some of the analysis that has to be done.
Senator Joni Ernst – R-Iowa (JE): Thank you, Madam Chair. And Dr. Kirkpatrick, the ODNI annual Threat Assessment states that China’s space activities are designed to erode U.S. influence across military, technological, economic and diplomatic spheres. Likewise, Russia will remain a key space competitor. In the course of your work, have you become aware of any Chinese or Russia[n] technical advancements to surveil or attack U.S. interests?
SK: So that’s a great question. Part of what we have to do as we go through these – especially the ones that show signatures of advanced, technical capabilities – is determine if there’s a foreign nexus. That’s really hard if what we observe doesn’t have a Chinese or Russian flag on the side of it. Now, I think it is prudent to say, of the cases that are showing some sort of advanced technical signature – of which, we’re talking single percentages of the entire population of cases we have – I am concerned about what that nexus is. And I have indicators that some are related to foreign capabilities. We have to investigate that with our IC partners, and as we get evidence to support that, that gets then handed off to the appropriate IC agency to investigate. Again, it becomes an SEP at that point.
JE: Yeah, Somebody Else’s Problem.
SK: Right.
JE: Very good. Thank you. Yes. Is it (laughs) possible that the Chinese or Russian advanced technologies could be causing some of these anomalous behaviors? And you said, there’s seems to be some indicators. So, just for us today, could you describe potential threat[s] that might exist out there if they are foreign nexus?
SK: Sure. In order to do this research appropriately, we have to also be cognizant of what is the state of the art in development across the S&T community. What are the DARPAs of the world doing? What’s the horizon scanning of emerging technologies – appropriate to this subcommittee – what is happening out there? And if somebody could accelerate that capability, how would that manifest itself and what would it look like? And do those signatures match what we’re seeing? There are emerging capabilities out there that, in many instances, Russia and China, well, China in particular, are on par or ahead of us in some areas. So previously, I used to be the Defense Department’s intelligence officer for science and technical intelligence. That was our job, was to look for…what does all that look like? And then, you know, my last several years, of course, in Space Command, doing space. The adversary is not waiting. They are advancing and they’re advancing quickly. If I were to put on some of my old hats, I would tell you, they are less risk averse at technical advancement than we are, right? They are just willing to try things and see if it works. Are there capabilities that could be employed against us in both an ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance), in a weapons fashion? Absolutely. Do I have evidence that they’re doing it in these cases? No, but I have concerning indicators.
JE: Thank you. I appreciate that. And that is why it’s so important that you are working with the Intelligence Community as well. Because you have the science, the data background, but you also need to know, from various sources, what adversaries may be working on. Correct. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair.
[the_ad_placement id=”content”]
KG: Senator Rosen?
Senator Jackie Rosen – D-Nevada (JR): Well, thank you, Chair Gillibrand, Ranking Member Ernst, this is a really important hearing. I’d like to thank you, Dr. Kirkpatrick, for your service to the country. And as a former systems analyst myself, I really appreciate your flowchart, the description of the process, and particularly the trends analysis going forward, how that’s gonna help us. And you talked about language, the LLMs, the large-language models of artificial intelligence. That’s really gonna help us in the hunt forward, predictive analysis, I think, to some of your point of what we’d be worried about.
But I want to focus on Nevada because I want to talk about the impact of UAPs on aviation safety. So when it comes to Unidentified Aerial Phenomenal…phenomena, excuse me, one of my first concerns is really about the safety of Nevada’s military aviator. So we have airmen stationed at Nellis Air Force Base, naval aviators flying at Naval Air Station Fallon, and service members from across the world, training at the Nevada test and training range. I know you know all this. And unfortunately, the existence of advanced UAPs in the U.S. airspace and over U.S. military installations [is] not a new phenomenon. The Navy’s officially acknowledged that between 2004 and 2021, eleven near misses occurred involving UAPs that required pilot action and follow up reports. As a result, in 2019, the Navy established a protocol for pilots to report on their dangerous encounters. So, could you speak to any ongoing efforts within DoD to ensure the safety of our aviators with a potential UAP encounter? And what’s your relationship with NORTHCOM, NORAD, Space Comm, when it comes to this immediate, real-time response? And how they’re right there in the moment, right?
SK: Absolutely. That’s a great question. So, let me start with…my relationship with the Commands are very good. I just came back from sitting down with with General van Herk, and all the J Staff out at NORTHCOMM a couple of weeks ago, talking through exactly what we need to do to help them get their arms around this. We are also working very closely with Joint Staff. And the Joint Staff has just been very outstanding in helping work through policy and guidance issues to the forces and to the services. And I would like to just make sure that we message back to all of the operators, the importance of their reporting, and the fact that you’re about to get a bunch of new requirements that we’re issuing through the Joint Staff, on all of the data that we’re gonna need you to save and report back to us. It is invaluable and we are working to try to take the most advantage of that, to learn what it is that we’re trying to mitigate.
To get directly to your question: First thing that we’re doing is normalizing our reporting, right? We’re standardizing our reporting and the requirements associated with that. Guidance from the Joint Staff, I think goes out maybe this week, maybe next week, on…that we’ve been working with them for some months, that does exactly what I just said. It gives them timelines, it gives them requirements, it gives them…here’s all the data you have to have. And you gotta retain it. The next thing that comes after that is a plan ord (Planning Order) that will go out to the Commands for mitigation and response. So there’s a couple of things that we have to do. One, I need to work with the Commands and with the IC, and with our…outside of our DoD and IC partners, to extend our collection posture, targeted at some of these key areas that you saw on that heat map that have a lot of activity, so that we can turn on extra collection when an operator sees something. So part of this is generating, as a response function, and what we call a tactic technique and procedure for an operator, when he sees something, calls back to the operations floor, they can turn on additional collection. What does that collection look like? How do I bring all that together so I can get more data on, what is that thing?
JR: Can I ask, really quickly.
SK: Sure.
JR: Do you have the authorities you need to extend your collection posture between agencies or branches of the military? Because that seems to me to maybe be a sticking point. I know my time is just about up. I’d love to follow up about your risk-management methodologies for some of these. But do you have need any authorities that you don’t have to get the data you need?
SK: There are some authorities that we need. We currently are operating under Title 10 authorities, but we have good relationships across the other agencies. But having additional authorities for collection, tasking, counter-intelligence…
JR: That’s something you…
SK: Those are all things that would be helpful, yes.
KG: Thank you. To follow up. Dr. Kirkpatrick, will you help us write that language so we can put it in the defense bill this year, so that we know what authorities you need?
SK: Uh huh.We can do that.
KG: Thank you. We’re gonna start second round, so if you want to stay, you can ask another round. I have at least three more questions.
JR: I have about a dozen more (laughs).
KG: Do you want to go right now in case you have to leave? Yeah, go ahead.
JR: I’m gonna stay on the drones issue because, obviously, we also have Creech Air Force Base, we talked about those Reapers…they’re flying out there. The last category, the Chinese spy balloon, it did cross through the U.S. airspace, shot down by a sidewinder missile, fired from an F-22. Sidewinders cost us close to half a million dollarseach. So, given the cost of these missiles, the cost per flight, all of these other things, like I said…follow up on the authorities, your methodologies, the data collection, they can help us in other ways. But how do you think we can develop a sustainable, affordable response to UAPs, where we need to, that may…that will definitely violate our airspace, not may. Definitely violate our airspace every chance that they can get, because they’re our adversaries and they want this information. So what do you think some cost-effective measures might be that we can get what we need out of that, or take them down? Whatever is appropriate, whatever the appropriate measure is, let’s put it that way.
SK: So that is actually wrapped into the plan ord that we’re working with Joint Staff to send out. What are the Commands need from both a capabilities perspective for kinetic and non-kinetic engagements? What are the response functions of the particular wings or Navy, what have you? And then, what authorities do they need? So one of the challenges that we’ve seen is, you know, there’s an authorities issues with the owners, operators of those ranges, that they need to work through. And we’re working with Joint Staff and OSD. So big picture, we need to do all that. If you want to get down to the specifics for, you know, there are non-kinetic options to engage pretty much everything, right? Whether it’s electronic warfare, whether it’s laser technologies…
JR: That’s where this data…having the good data collection, predicting analytics, you can make some assumptions on possibilities.
SK: That’s right. And we will inform recommendations back to The Department on, here’s what could work, here’s what we’ve seen work, here’s what doesn’t work.
JR: Thank you so much. Thank you, Madam Chair. Appreciate it.
KG: Thank you very much. I just want to just talk a little bit about your logistics, who you report to, how that’s going, whether you need different reporting lines. By congressional legislation, your office is administratively located within the office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security, but you’re not substantively subordinate to the undersecretary. Rather, you are to direct report to the deputy secretary. Are you taking direction directly from the deputy secretary? Are you able to meet and brief the deputy secretary? Is the office of USD(I&S) working with you to have the right framework?
SK: So, USD(I&S) and the…I currently report to USD(I&S) until they come up with the plan for how they’re going to implement legislation. DoD and DNI are working through that now. I’d have to refer you back to USD(I&S) on what their plan is. Umm…
KG: Do I need to update your reporting structure in the next defense bill or is this something that you think will work its way out, or does it need further clarity?
SK: I think they’re planning on coming back to you with an answer on what that plan is, and I think, at that time, that will inform what you want to do.
KG: Okay, thank you. As you know, Dr. Kirkpatrick, Congress has mandated that your office establish a discoverable and accessible electronic method for potential witnesses of UAP incidents and potential participants in government UAP-related activities, to contact to your office and tell their stories. Congress also set up a process whereby people subject to non-disclosure agreements, preventing them from disclosing what they may have witnessed or participated in, could tell you what they know without risk of retribution from the…or violation of their NDAs. Have you submitted a public-facing website product for approval to your superiors, and how long has it been under review?
SK: I have. We submitted the first version of that before Christmas.
KG: And do you have an estimate from them when they will respond and when you’ll have feedback on that?
SK: No, I don’t.
KG: Okay. We will author a letter – asking for that timely response – to your superiors.
Full text of the letter is below, in my tweet.
The battle continues. Remember, it's gonna be a long haul, and you need to have patience because certain folks will continue to fight and do whatever it takes to keep this secret from being revealed. Folks like Warner and Rubio need… https://t.co/p8ZaezYmiI
KG: When do you expect that you will establish a public facing, discoverable and access portal for people to use to contact your office, as the law requires?
SK: So, I would like to first say, thank you all very much for referring the witnesses that you have thus far to us. I appreciate that. We’ve brought in nearly two dozen, so far. It’s been very helpful. I’d ask that you continue to do that until we have an approved plan. We have a multi-phased approach for doing that, that we’ve been socializing and have submitted for approval, some time. And once that happens, then we should be able to push all that out and get this a little more automated.
KG: Great.
SK: What I would ask, though, is, as you all continue to refer to us and refer witnesses to us – I’d appreciate if you’d do that – please try to prioritize the ones that you want to do, because we do have a small research staff, dealing with that.
KG: Thank you. And then, do you have any plans for public engagement that you want to share now, that you think it’s important that the public knows what the plan is?
SK: So we have a number of public-engagement recommendations, according to our strategic plan. All of those have been submitted for approval, they have to be approved by USD(I&S). We are waiting for approval to go do that.
KG: Okay, I will follow up on that. And then my last question is about the integration of departments, UAP operations, research, analysis and strategic communications. During the recent UAP incidents over North America, it didn’t appear that you were allowed to play that role. Do you agree that the public perception is generally that you and your office did not appear to play a major role in the Department’s response to the detection of objects over North America? What can you tell us that’s going on behind the scenes, from your perspective? And in the after-action-assessment process, is there awareness that there is a need to operate differently in the future and a commitment to doing so?
SK: When the objects were first detected, I got called by Joint-Staff leadership to come in late one night to review events as they were unfolding and to give them an assessment, based on what we knew at that time. I did that. I worked with the director of the Joint Staff, the J2 and the J3that night and over the couple of following days on, what are the types of things that we are tracking from a unidentified object perspective? What databases do we use? Those sorts of things for normal…for known objects, known tracking. Beyond that, their response, I would have to refer you back to the White House for the decision on how they did the response. We did not play a role in what you would respond, other than that initial, you know, advice on what we are seeing and how we are seeing it.
[the_ad id=”1724″]
KG: Senator Ernst? (KG’s mic was muted so I’m assuming that’s what she said. ~Joe).
Senator Joni Ernst (JE): Thank you, Madam Chair. Dr. Kirkpatrick, I know that your office has gotten a lot of attention recently. And, of course, any new agency, there tends to be a push to increase size and funding. We want to make sure that you’re able to meet your goals, but what I also need to ensure is that we’re not duplicating or replicating existing functions and creating redundancy within DoD and the inter-agencies. So, what steps are you taking right now to make sure that your particular office and function is unique to any of the other agencies that might be involved in these types of cases?
SK: Yeah, that’s a great question. So, I would like to lay down…here’s one of my, you know, sort of my mission and my goal and my vision here. So the vision is, at one point…at some point in the future, you should not need an AARO. If I’m successful in what I’m doing, we should be able to normalize everything that we’re doing into existing processes, functions, agencies and organizations, and make that part of their mission and their role. Right now, the niche that we form is really going after the unknowns. I think you articulated it early on, this is a hunt mission for what might somebody be doing in our backyard that we don’t know about. Alright, well, that, that, that is what we are doing, right? But at some point, we should be able to normalize that. That’s why it’s so important the work we’re doing with Joint Staff to normalize that into DoD policy and guidance. We are bringing in all of our interagency partners. So NASA is providing a liaison for us. I have FBI liaison, I have OSI liaison, I have service liaisons. Half of my staff come from the IC. Half of my staff come from other scientific and technical backgrounds. I have DOE. And so, what we’re trying to do is ensure, again, as I make UAP into SEP, they get handed off to the people that that is their mission to go do. So that we aren’t duplicating that. I’m not gonna go chase the Chinese high-altitude balloon, for example. That’s not my job. It’s not an unknown and it’s not anomalous, anymore. Now it goes over to them…right?
JE: Very good. Thank you, Madam Chair.
KG: Thank you. I want to just to follow up on the filters for surveillance. Outside observers have speculated that DoD sets filters on certain sensors to eliminate objects that are moving really fast or slow, because what we are looking for, militarily, are conventional aircraft and missiles.
(2/2) Today, drones, balloons, and other UAV are growing threats and a review of the settings on these mighty systems is overdue.
“If these radars are so heavily filtered that they did not detect the objects swarming the USS Omaha and USS Russelloff the coast of California in 2019, then perhaps it is time to modify the filtering algorithms of these radars or perhaps feed the same radar data in real-time into a separate filtering process tailored to detect and assess these new potential new threats. Otherwise, we risk needlessly missing vital intelligence information.”
KG: UAP that doesn’t fit into these programs would thereby be weeded out and never noticed. The spectrum of speculation was proven to be true during the UAP incidents over North America, where DoD publicly acknowledged that we were able to start seeing these UAPs only when we opened up these filters. Obviously, our military operators cannot be overloaded with objects that are not conventional aircraft or missiles. Can you nonetheless make sure that the raw data is being captured and subsequently processed so that your office knows what’s really out there? And is that going to cost money, will you expect to pay for that money out of AARO’s budget?
SK: One of the key tenants that we’re trying to do in our science plan is understand what those signatures are. So we get all the raw, for example, radar data, prior to the scrubbing and filtering to allow it to enter into our weapon systems and our detection systems. We are now taking all that data and cross correlating it to what pilots are saying they’re seeing or other observations from other operators. What that allows us to do is then see if there are any signatures in that data that I can pull out, generate – what we’ll call automatic-target-recognition algorithms – that allow us to then use that signature associated with [an] observed UAP, whatever that UAP may be. We will then make those recommendations, of what those changes should be, back to the department. So the deputy secretary had asked me last October to make those recommendations. What changes do we need to make to radars, to platforms, to detection systems, and algorithms, to pull on those algorithms [and] make those changes? That’s gonna take some time, that’s where the research and development comes in, right? It’s not instantaneous. Right now, a lot of the…I won’t say, a lot of the things that fall outside of the ranges of those filters have been identified by people in the loop, and you can’t have people in the loop all the time. It’s just not cost effective. So part of our budget is working through, what does that look like, and then making those recommendations back to the big-program offices for them to put into changes and acquisition.
KG: My last question is about the academic community. Can you give us an update on sort of how you collaborate with the academic community and whether…how the independent study being done by NASA complements AARO’s work?
SK: Sure. Two questions so I’m gonna try to make it quick. In 1979, Carl Sagan said, “Extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence.” I would go one step further, and I would say, extraordinary claims, require not only extraordinary evidence, but extraordinary science. And so how do you do that? You do that with the scientific method, right? And so as AARO is developing and implementing its science plan, it has to do so grounded in a solid foundation of scientific theory, across the entire range of hypotheses that have been presented for what UAP are. That range spans, adversary-breakthrough technology on one hand, known objects and phenomena in the middle, all the way to the extreme theories of extraterrestrials. All of that has physics-based signatures associated with it. Whether it’s theoretical, from the academic community, known from things like hypersonic weapons, or adversary-breakthrough technologies, as we’ve talked about before. Or the known objects that we have to go measure. The idea is, across that entire range, you have to come up with peer-reviewed, scientific basis for all of it. The academic community plays a very big role on the one end of the spectrum, the intelligence community on the other end of the spectrum, and then measurement in the middle. Once I have those signatures identified in validated, peer-reviewed documents, then I have something to point to for all that data. Because all that data is gonna match one of those signatures, right? And then I can go, “Well, it’s that and not that,” or, “It’s that.” And that helps us go through all that.
Where NASA comes in and the study that they’re doing, which I’m supporting, is really looking at the unclassified, data sources that might be used to augment our classified data sources, to understand if there’s a signature there we can pull on. So very similar to the radars, but civil capabilities. So, for example, we have a lot of climate-science satellites, for example, that look at Earth. Lots of them. How many of those is the data valuable in seeing these kinds of objects? The challenge in that is those platforms don’t necessarily have the resolution you need. So if you remember the slide I put up there with the trends, the size of the objects we’re looking for are typically reported to be one to four meters. Well, the resolution of many of the climate science, civil satellites, is much larger than that, which means you’d have a hard time picking out something that’s smaller than a pixel on the imagery, on the data. That’s not to say all of it’s not useful and there are ways of pulling through that data and going… That is what NASA is focused on right now. What are some other data sources that could be used? In addition, things like open source and crowdsourcing of data, we’re exploring public/private partnerships. Ma’am, as you know, we’ve talked about in the past, to look at: Is there a way to smartly crowdsource additional data that might be useful to augment some of my classified sources? And what does that look like? And how would we do it so that we’re not overwhelmed by, you know, everybody who wants to take a picture of everything?
KG: Is there anything else you’d like to tell the committee before we close?
SK: Thank you very much for allowing us to come and share a little bit of insight into what AARO’s up to and what we’re doing. I hope to be able to share a whole lot more in the future. We have a lot of work to do, so if you don’t hear from me outside, it’s because we’ve got a lot of work to do.
KG: Well, thank you so much, Dr. Kirkpatrick, thank you for the hearing.
SK: Thank you.
[the_ad_placement id=”content”]
🛸 Recommended Intelligence Resource
As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.
In this enthralling episode of the UFO Insight Podcast, our host Marcus Lowth delves into a series of intriguing UFO sightings reported by pilots and crew members. With years of experience in aviation, these professionals possess a keen eye for the unexplained phenomena in the skies.
The episode begins with a deep analysis of the trailblazing Kenneth Arnold sighting in the summer of 1947, an event that ignited the modern UFO era. Marcus shares insights into Arnold’s account of witnessing nine crescent-shaped objects moving at breakneck speeds across the skies, which ultimately led to the coining of the term “flying saucers.”
Following this, the discussion moves on to the riveting Flight 1628 Encounter that occurred in 1986. The Japan Air Lines cargo flight experienced an extraordinary event when the crew spotted a series of unidentified lights and enormous structures during their journey over Alaska. The incident resulted in extensive radar confirmation and attracted significant media attention.
The Air France Flight AF3532 Near Miss Incident is yet another compelling case. In 1994, a commercial flight encountered an unidentified object flying at high altitude over Paris, France. The object was described as being reddish-brown and having an elongated shape, ultimately posing a potential threat to the aircraft.
As the episode progresses, Marcus delves into the Air Shuttle Flight 5959 Incident, which took place in 1995. During this event, both the crew and passengers on board witnessed a pulsating, multicolored light hovering in the sky. The incident was further corroborated by another aircraft in the vicinity, confirming the mysterious nature of the sighting.
The 1995 Manchester Airport Incident involved a near-collision between an aircraft and an unidentified object during the plane’s final approach. The incident led to a thorough investigation, but the object remains unidentified to this day.
Marcus then discusses the enigmatic Long Island Incident, which took place in 1996. In this case, a seasoned pilot witnessed a formation of white lights while flying over the eastern United States. Despite an extensive inquiry, the lights’ origin remains a mystery.
The captivating Kennedy Airport Incident took place in 2001, involving an air traffic controller who observed a fast-moving, cigar-shaped object. The episode dives into the details and potential explanations for this intriguing sighting.
Finally, the episode concludes with the Sweden to Humberside Sighting, which occurred in 2003. The crew of a commercial flight observed an inexplicable triangular-shaped object while flying over the North Sea. The sighting is considered one of the most credible UFO encounters due to the detailed descriptions provided by the experienced crew.
Join Marcus Lowth in this spellbinding episode of the UFO Insight Podcast as he uncovers the truth behind these remarkable encounters, offering a unique perspective on the UFO phenomenon from the vantage point of those who navigate the skies.
Chapters
0:00–0:43 – Introduction
0:43–6:59 – The Kenneth Arnold Sighting
6:59–9:47 – The Flight 1628 Encounter
9:47–14:13 – The Air France Flight AF3532 Near Miss Incident
14:13–15:54 – The Air Shuttle Flight 5959 Incide
🛸 Recommended Intelligence Resource
As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.
In this intriguing episode of the UFO Insight Podcast, our seasoned researcher Marcus Lowth delves into the fascinating connections between UFO and alien encounters, and paranormal activities suggestive of ghosts and hauntings. With years of expertise in investigating all aspects of the paranormal, Marcus will lead listeners through an eye-opening journey, discussing how understanding these seemingly disparate phenomena may be crucial to unlocking the mysteries of our universe.
Marcus initiates the conversation by exploring the general connections between UFOs and the paranormal, focusing on the uncanny similarities that often arise in encounters with aliens. He questions whether aliens, ghosts, and poltergeists might be interrelated or even identical entities, and how this possibility could signify a greater interconnectedness within the paranormal spectrum. By examining one phenomenon, he posits, we may gain insight into the others, broadening our understanding of the unknown.
Throughout the episode, Marcus delves into the concept of frequency and vibration, and how these underlying forces could play a role in connecting various paranormal experiences. He explains how these frequencies might be manipulated or harnessed by extraterrestrial beings, allowing them to interact with our world and potentially explain the diverse range of encounters reported by witnesses.
Marcus also shares the gripping alien abduction encounters of Tracey Jones, recounting the chilling details of her experiences, and how they intersect with other paranormal events. By examining the consistency in the accounts of her abductions and comparing them with other cases, Marcus sheds light on the potential patterns and connections that exist within this realm.
The enigmatic case of Bob Rylance is another captivating story Marcus discusses, exploring the possible connections between his UFO sightings, alleged alien communication, and strange occurrences in his home. Marcus highlights how these events may be linked and offer valuable insights into the complex relationships between UFOs, aliens, and the paranormal.
Lastly, Marcus delves into the bizarre encounters of a woman referred to as “Julie,” who experienced a series of unexplained phenomena involving UFO sightings, alien visitations, and ghostly manifestations. By examining Julie’s encounters, Marcus aims to reveal a deeper understanding of the interconnectedness between these phenomena and how they might be intertwined in ways we have yet to fully comprehend.
Join us for this captivating episode of UFO Insight Podcast, as Marcus Lowth takes us on a journey through the enigmatic world of UFOs, aliens, and the paranormal, uncovering the intricate connections that exist between these mysterious phenomena.
Chapters
0:00–0:39 – Introduction
0:39–4:01 – General Connections Between UFOs And The Paranormal
4:01–6:58 – Frequency And Vibration
6:58–14:45 – The Alien Abduction Encounters Of Tracey Jones
14:45–17:07 – The Case Of Bob Rylance
17:07–26:01 – The Bizarre Encounters Of “Julie”
26:01–28:19 – Summary
As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.
In this thought-provoking episode of the UFO Insight Podcast, our host Marcus Lowth delves into the fascinating world of the Ancient Astronaut Theory. This hypothesis postulates that extraterrestrial beings visited our planet thousands of years ago, significantly impacting human civilization and shaping our history.
Join Marcus as he scrutinizes the work of Swiss author Erich von Däniken, who played a pivotal role in popularizing this theory. The conversation then expands to explore various legends and myths from antiquity that seem to allude to encounters with otherworldly beings. Dive deep into the enigmatic Indus Valley Civilization, one of the most advanced ancient societies, and examine the reasons behind recording these intriguing legends.
The discussion further examines the perplexing megalithic structures found across the globe. Marcus ponders whether these awe-inspiring constructions could be evidence of an unknown, advanced civilization, potentially linked to extraterrestrial intervention. As the episode unfolds, Marcus searches for the elusive “missing link” that could bridge the gap between traditional historical accounts and the Ancient Astronaut Theory.
Listeners will be captivated by Marcus’s extensive research into UFOs, the paranormal, and ancient mysteries, which he has honed over two decades. Don’t miss this enthralling episode that connects the dots between the past and the present, as we continue to unravel the enigma of Earth’s enigmatic history and its possible otherworldly influences. So, buckle up and get ready for a mind-bending journey into the unknown.
Chapters
0:00–0:52 – Introduction
0:52–5:14 – What Is The Ancient Astronaut Theory?
5:14–7:57 – The Theories Of Eric Von Daniken
7:57–11:02 – Other Legends From Antiquity
11:02–13:15 – The Indus Valley Civilization
13:15–14:57 – Why Were These Legends Recorded?
14:57–16:17 – Megalithic Structures
16:17–18:07 – An Unknown Civilization
18:07–19:54 – The Missing Link
19:54–22:38 – Summary
As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.
“When you see something like that, you never forget it. It’s changes your life in a way that it puts things in perspective. So when you hear other people’s stories about this stuff, I feel inherently like I want to protect them. I want to help them not be attacked for something that they saw, because it’s wrong.”
If you like what you see on my blog, my Twitter and YouTube Channel and appreciate the time and effort, here are links to my Patreon, Pay Pal and Venmo. I appreciate any and all support. Without that support, I would struggle to do this as much as I do.
Tucker Carlson (TC): Welcome to Tucker Carlson. Today, the crazy thing about the topic of UFOs is how, when you get into it, how really non-crazy a lot of the people who know a lot about the topic turn out to be. They’re kind of the opposite of what you imagine. They’re not fruity conspiracy nuts, a lot of them are just scientists. Garry Nolan is definitely at the top of that list. He’s a Stanford professor, Stanford, PhD. He’s an immunologist. And he has, over the last decade or two, spent a lot of time studying the harmful effects that apparent encounters with UFOs have on the human brain. This is a field of study, and he is at the very top of it. Dr. Garry Nolan, he joins us in studio. Professor, thanks so much for coming on.
Dr. Garry Nolan (GN): Thank you so much.
TC: I was just reading your (Full Bio) again, just to restate the same point, once more: It’s just remarkable, once you get into this topic…I don’t know if mainstream is the word, but it’s not fringe, at all. So just to kind of accentuate that point, explain your background for our viewers, if you would.
GN: So my main job, my day job at Stanford for the last thirty years, has been the development of technologies to look at cancer, and blood. And so, we’ve spun a number of companies and sold a number of companies that we started out in my lab. Two of them are actually on NASDAQ. And the idea has always been that if money is coming in from the National Institutes of Health, we should give back to the public. And so, in the process of developing some of these, we developed an instrument called CyTOF, which is really all about studying blood cells at a deeper level than anybody has been able to do before.
~~~
~~~
~~~
GN: And so, it was circa 2011 or so when some people from the CIA, and an aerospace company (Nolan has confirmed that this was Dr. Kit Green and Dr. Colm Kelleher ~Joe) came to me to ask me for their help on the analysis of some individuals who had encountered some anomalous objects, they said. And they came to my office, unannounced, and then started laying out pictures and data on the table in front of me. And I honestly thought it was a joke. I thought it was… (cross talk)
TC: You’re a Stanford professor…(laughs), an immunologist, doing medical research and building companies, and all of a sudden, one day the CIA shows up at your office?
GN: Because they had asked around and said, “Okay, we have these people who’ve been injured.” And one of the things that they wanted to do in a complete medical workup of these individuals was to look at the blood. It’s a natural thing to do. If you’re looking for an inflammation, the blood is one of the places you might look to get sort of a more complete list of everything that’s going on in the body. And so, that’s when somebody said, “Well, if you want to do this [and] do it properly, you gotta go talk to this guy Nolan at Stanford because he has the world’s best instrument that he’s developed for doing it.” And that’s what started it.
TC: So what was your view of UFOs/UAPs at the time?
GN: You know, I was kind of a science fiction fan, and I was interested in it as any mainstream individual might have been. But it wasn’t something that I had any kind of focus on in my life.
TC: So you had no deep knowledge of the topic.
GN: No deep knowledge.
TC: Were you surprised that a US government agency was doing this kind of work? I mean, presumably, the question was settled for them.
GN: Yeah.
TC: They didn’t wonder if UFOs were real, they knew at that point, right?
GN: Right. Right. No, of course. I mean, like I said, I mean, at first I thought it was a joke. I mean, I really thought that I was being…somebody was about to put me on Candid Camera, and make a joke of it.
~~~
~~~
GN: But as they started showing me the data, and they were deadly serious. I mean, I tried to lure them into making a joke about it. They were deadly serious about it, because they had basically said, at that point, people have died. And so, and then they showed me some brain images of individuals who had been damaged and internal scarring, you could see through MRIs. And, you know, it’s data, it’s unmistakable. You have to say, “Okay, well, what did that?” I can conjecture, or hypothesize about, you know, is it the Russians, is it UFOs or whatever. But the fact is, there is data that says something is happening and so we need to study it. And that’s what a scientist should do.
~~~
TC: Of course! Oh, absolutely! But first, some context. Who were these people who had been injured or killed?
GN: Oh, they were military personnel, people, intelligence agents on the ground, a pilot – a few pilots, actually – who had gotten close enough and they had some sort of effects.
Important Lue statements about the potential new official UAP program, medical effects on pilots and the consensus in government that UAPs are not Russian or Chinese 👇👇 pic.twitter.com/uoBbF5s4QS
– Pilots possibly suffering from radiation burns – Pilots losing track of time – Admirals emailing Lue about swarming UAPs which meant crews had to be kept below deck – Three U.S presidents briefed – Royal Family is interested – Surprising details from foreign nations to come? https://t.co/cjR3ME6LWN
Lue Elizondo on Fox Business: "In reality what we think it was,was exposure to high-frequency radiation and as the pilots got closer,they started to experience internal organ damage, specifically,in the human brain"#ufo#ufotwitter#uaptwitter@Akam1129https://t.co/Iq36RfPgk4
1 #ufos and Injuries – Hal Puthoff – West Virginia Lecture – 2020
HP: "Now it turns out that one of the side effects of engineering the spacetime metric, to get this kind of flight performance, is that it…we call it…blueshifts the frequencies. All the frequencies that are pic.twitter.com/ogRYQsrgbg
TC: Gotten close enough to some sort of unknown aircraft.
GN: To some sort of object. One of them, on the ground, as well…walked right up to it and touched it. And actually, his case is pretty famous.
~~~
The Rendlesham Forest Case
~~~
GN: And even Senator McCain was able to come in and help this individual (John Burroughs) because the Army was denying him – was it the Army or the Air Force – was denying him medical benefits. And so, eventually it reached the office of Senator McCain. And he stepped in and forced the Veterans Affairs to…
TC: He walked up and touched it? Can you back up and just tell me…what was the story there?
GN: That was the so-called Rendlesham Forest case in England, where objects were seen over the bunkers where the nuclear weapons were stored. And things were seen…
TC: In the 70s?
GN: In the 70s or so, yeah. There’s quite a few documentaries on it. But the individuals who were actually there, I know one of them quite well (once again, John Burroughs). And he was the person who was basically denied benefits and his medical records were classified for quite a while. They wouldn’t let anything out about him. Why?
TC: So he touched this object?
GN: Yeah.
(It was Jim Penniston, co-author of “The Rendlesham Enigma,” who says he touched the craft. ~Joe)
~~~
TC: Did he describe the object?
GN: Yeah, he described the object as basically about four or five feet across, with strange writing on it. I don’t know. I mean, it’s a longtime story.
~~~
~~~
~~~
GN: I don’t try too much to get into the stories and to the ancient literature because there’s so many arguments and mis and disinformation about it. I’m more interested in: Let’s collect new data and study it, right? Let’s collate the data in a way and try to convince other scientists that the data is real, not that a conclusion is real. So, I try to stay away from that because there’s plenty of arguments and historians who know how to do that.
TC: You stay right in your lane.
GN: I stay in my lane because that’s what I’m good at!
TC: Yeah. Good call.
GN: So, just stay away from it.
TC: So this man, specifically, military personnel who touched this object in the woods near a nuclear bunker in Great Britain, what happened to him?
GN: He had all kinds of…he had nausea, he had long-term consequences to his heart. Now, whether any of this was directly caused by the object or not is open to debate. But, in the immediate aftermath of the interaction that he had with it, there were medical consequences. So, you’d have to imagine that somewhere back then, something happened to him that he’s still dealing with, years later. I mean, long COVID is an example of…there can be a traumatic incident that occurs to your body, and later on, you’re still dealing with it.
TC: Of course! Well, many of those.
GN: But part of the issue with him was sort of a PTSD, that nobody would believe him, right? And then when he tried to follow up with the Veterans Affairs Office, the medical offices, they just denied him coverage, which was ridiculous because he served his country, and yet they were ignoring him.
TC: But the CIA believed him, it sounds like?
GN: Yes. Well, what happened is that a number of cases like this started becoming known, right? And so, what happens is that these cases and events kind of trickle up the chain, and then get moved across the DoD and put in a bucket. Let’s just call it the weird bucket…until enough of them have occurred, that somebody says, “Okay, there’s something we should be paying attention to.” Havana Syndrome is an example of that, right? That enough individuals in diplomatic offices, etc, were getting sick and so there was a pattern beginning to occur and emerge, and so somebody realized, okay, somebody is probably attacking our personnel in these offices, the diplomatic corps, etc. So, those cases all end up over in a bucket where eventually somebody pays attention to it, and that was what then instigated them to come to me.
~~~
TC: Interesting. So how many cases, roughly?
GN: About a hundred?
TC: A hundred?!
GN: Yeah. Now of those, about probably 80 to 90% of them ended up being actually Havana Syndrome. So as we were studying these cases, the guy who was doing the work, his name is Kit Green.He’s a neurophysiologist, and is also associated with the CIA, used to be in the CIA. He was going back to what are called the diagnostic codes, because, when you have a new medical issue, you start saying, “Okay, well, what happened to them?” Let’s say they’ve got this kind of phenomena, they got this kind of problem with their lungs, and they’ve got inflammation of the skin, et cetera. And you put them into these codes. And so, it was around 2015-2016 that…and we had, up to that point in time, called this interference syndrome. Something was interfering with these individuals. But then it became obvious that the diplomatic corps issues were happening and that many of the symptoms in those individuals, in the Havana Syndrome individuals, matched some of the, or most of the symptoms that we had in our big bucket. Why? Because they were in the weird bucket at the time and they just ended up being Havana Syndrome, but that was good, in a way, because we were able to take those individuals out and out of consideration [and] I didn’t have to worry about them anymore. It now became a national security concern. But the people who were remaining were the really interesting ones to me because those are the people who claim to have interactions with UAPs, right? So it was kind of like, in science, you first characterize, you collate into categories.
TC: Yes.
GN: The categories that are understood, you just step aside, and put them aside and they’re handed off. It’s a huge operation in the government to deal with those. In fact, the Senate Intelligence Committee just came out with a report this morning, that has language specifically in it to look at the Havana Syndrome cases and to understand it. Also has interesting – I don’t know if you saw it – it also has language about UAPs, and basically, admonishing the Defense Department, saying, “You guys have been dragging your feet. No more.” [It also contains] whistleblower language. There was also a situation where they want to go all the way back to 1947…all the Defense Department and the CIA, etc, to collect all the information around events that have occurred. They want all of, interestingly, the NDAs, the non-disclosure-agreements. They want those all listed because the NDAs are associated to people, and that means they can start to name the people who have been involved. They want all of the information on the disinformation and the obfuscation that’s been going on, and they want information about the medical harms that have occurred. And that’s all in the National Defense Appropriations (Authorization ~Joe) Act for 2023.
TC: So this is way outside your lane, but since you’ve had so much experience dealing with all the people involved, maybe you have a theory? Why do you think DoD, or the U.S. government, more broadly, has lied about this for so long?
GN: So, I think that they were just afraid of admitting that they don’t have control over the airspace. That’s one thing. But also, it’s really back to what it is that I was saying before: We have the data, to the extent that there is proof that there’s something else here. They didn’t want anybody to know about it because they’re scared of what the reaction might be.
TC: No, it makes sense. I mean, that’s a human reaction.
GN: It’s a human reaction. But, the other point is, I think that’s important to realize, is that: When a lot of, let’s say, these events were occurring, and there’s claimed crash materials that might have been collected, this went off to places like Lockheed and all of the big aerospace companies, [and] they wanted to profit off of it.
~~~
May update or change it tomorrow but for now, here it is…
GN: And many of them basically took a lot of the information, set it aside, and they decided, “Okay, well, we’re going to profit off it. We’re not going to tell Congress what this is all about because, if we do, then maybe we have to share this with McDonnell Douglas, or someone else.”
TC: So if an aerospace – and I’ve heard this theory from very informed people, I don’t think it’s a theory, it sounds true – that, if there are crash materials, and apparently there are, those reside in the custody of not the U.S. government (Nolan: Exactly) but of contractors who work for the U.S. government, aerospace, defense contractors…McDonnell Douglas, Lockheed, etc. How could they profit off those materials?
GN: Well, one, they can continue to ask for black-budget money.
TC: Oh (both laugh). I should know this, I lived in Washington! Right. The funding continues.
GN: Right? I mean, the funding can continue. You might hope, eventually, that you can understand it and thereby profit off of it. You know, but my point has been that whatever this stuff is, is hundreds of technology revolutions ahead of us and understandings of physics that we don’t appreciate. So, it’s kind of like, I mean, the old…send a cell phone back to a Neanderthal and see what he does with it. Pound rocks, so.
TC (laughs) He eats it, yeah. No, it’s totally right. Fascinating. So, it sounds like in the world that you live in, it is taken for granted, which is assumed to be true, that this stuff is real.
GN: Yes. Yeah, it’s 100% real. I mean, there’s just no doubt about it. I mean, the data is real. And this is what I [hear] when I have these conversations with other scientists who have told me, “Garry, you’re gonna ruin your reputation.” And I’m like, “Well, my reputation has been always going against the grain and look at where I am. I’m perfectly fine going against the grain.” This is real and we need to pay attention to it and it’s just unscientific to not study it.
TC: Yes. Amen.
GN: Right? I mean, it’s just wrong. And if you’re going to be that way, you’re a priest, you’re not a scientist.
TC: Amen. Thank you for saying that. I feel that way about a lot of things that touch science, but this is definitely one of them. So why would the aerospace company – that you have not named, I’ve noticed – why would they be interested in finding [out], along with the CIA, the answers to these questions?
GN: Technology! You’ve seen the reports on how these things move: Zero to five thousand miles an hour, instantaneous acceleration and deceleration, trans-medium travel.
TC: Meaning from air to water to water?
GN: Air to water. Yeah. We can’t do any of that. We just can’t.
~~~
USS Omaha – Safire FLIR footage of alleged trans-medium object
👇🏼👇🏼👇🏼
~~~
TC: And moreover, we don’t know how it’s done.
GN: We don’t know how it’s done. And so that means that there’s a level of physics that can be appreciated and maybe taken advantage of. I mean, hundreds, thousands of years ago, we looked at birds, and we saw they could fly and we said, “We want to fly.” So now we see this happening and now we realize that our physics doesn’t answer how that moves. So, we need new physics. And so that, to me, is the most important aspect of this. But, if we go back to like, where my career came from, I always look at data and say, “What can I do with this and make something out of it to give back? What technology can I create that can be used by everybody?” So, similarly, I look at these materials – and I do have some public materials – and I say, “If I can understand these at the atomic level, and understand how these things are put together, I might not understand how anti-gravity works but I can now bring in scientists who might be experts in the kinds of atoms that are there and say, “Tell me what this might have been used for, because this is where it came from.”
TC: But, I mean, all of it…we’re sort of, like, alighting around the central question, which is like, “Who made these things? Who are these people, these things? What is this force? Not human?
GN: Yeah. I don’t know. I mean…and that’s why it’s so hard for me not to say what I think it really is because if I do say, “It is absolutely this,” people will start to question me.
TC: Of course. Because you can’t know, right?
GN: Right. But I think the better way to do it is to convince people that the data is real.
TC: Let’s move back just one sentence. So, without putting your professional credibility, reputation, on the line, etc. – You’re around people who study this stuff for a living who are the most knowledgeable people on this topic in the world…
GN: Yes.
TC: What is their general sense of what this might be?
GN: That this is not from Earth?
TC: Right. That it’s not from Earth, that this is some…these are aliens, essentially?
GN: Right. And, you know, until I see a piece of technology that does something I don’t understand, or until I see an alien body, I’m going to also remain skeptical.
TC: Of course, as you should.
GN: But, it doesn’t mean I won’t study it. And people say, “Well, why, if you are so skeptical, still, you’re studying it?” Because it’s the most important thing that could have ever happened.
TC: Of course! (laughs) That’s why we cover it on the show! Not because…I have no special knowledge, I know nothing, really. But…by definition, it’s the most important. So, is the general belief that these objects, these, whatever this is, is coming from outside our atmosphere, or that it’s coming from beneath the oceans?
GN: Both, I think. I mean, whatever it is, it’s clearly been here for a long time and it doesn’t necessarily care so much about us. But in terms of, you know…if it wanted to wipe us out, it could.
TC: Clearly, obviously.
GN: All you got to do is go out to the asteroid belt and push a big rock our way and that’s the end of us. We’re the next dinosaur problem.
TC: Yes.
GN: So, the next question is: Well, if they’ve been here all along, before we were even civilized, well, whose planet is this, really?
TC: And do you think that there is evidence that this is an ongoing thing?
GN: Yeah! Yeah, yeah. I mean, so, I don’t know if you know, the astronomer and venture capitalist, Jacques Vallée? You’ve probably heard of him.
TC: Of course, yes.
GN: And…so he’s actually a good friend. And he’s written books about the matter, showing that if you go back into the historical records, things written by the scientists and philosophers and mayors and kings of the day, you know, it’s in the record.
~~~
~~~
GN: This object was seen, it looked like a wheel, or it looked like a shield. And it showed up over our battles, and, you know, et cetera, et cetera. So, you can go back and re-context the observations and say, “Well, if somebody wrote that today, I’d call it a UFO or a UAP, right?”
TC: Of course.
~~~
~~~
~~~
GN: So, it’s been here. I think, really, you know, one thing you have to ask is: Well, why do they show up? And maybe it’s just…and why don’t they land? That’s a question I often get asked. Well, why would you? I mean, do you try to establish diplomatic relations with the ants in your garden when you move into a new house?
TC: (laughs hysterically)
GN: (laughs) Right? No, you do what you want and you dig up the yard and you do as you please. You try not to interfere with them. You know, if there’s a nest of birds, you’re not going to interfere, you’re gonna try not to bother them because you’ve got your own business going on, you’re doing your own thing. So, what that thing is, I don’t know.
GN: Yes. Well, I think, if you ask yourself the question: How could we negatively interact with them, right? I mean, there’s probably little that even they could do if we blew up a nuclear bomb around them. So, to the extent that we have reached a level of technological capability, where we can be a problem to them, nuclear weapons are one of them, right? I mean, but look as far as where we’re gonna be a thousand years from now. We’re starting to move out, like, with Elon Musk, into Mars, maybe someday we’ll be able to travel to other solar systems, even by conventional means. So, if you are an emerging species in this area of the galaxy and there are elders running around, maybe they want to pay attention to the monkeys who, you know, are usually throwing mud up against each other on the walls and stuff (smiles).
TC: (laughs) No, it’s a completely… Does this bother you at all?
GN: No. I think it’s exciting. I mean, why would it bother me? I mean, because I don’t think that they’re here necessarily to harm us. And if they want to, they can, so nothing I have any control over. So..
TC: Is there any evidence of the hundred cases that you’ve looked at, that any of those human beings were harmed on purpose?
GN: No. I think it’s just [similar to] if you happen to walk across an airfield and get in the way of the exhaust plume of a jet engine, you’re gonna get harmed.
TC: Before I ask you to describe what those harms are, because you’ve seen strong patterns, right? In the harms?
GN: Yeah.
TC: There are innumerable first person accounts of people who say/claim they have been taken into some craft and experimented upon.
GN: Right.
This “Unsolved Mysteries” episode is one of the best I’ve ever seen on abductions. 👇🏼
TC: Have you come across those, and how do you assess them?
GN: I come across those, but I, you know, have a hard time…it’s like what I was saying before: It’s an encounter, it’s an experience, but whether those experiences are real, or whether or not they’re imposed on these individuals as sort of an altered-reality memory, I don’t know. I mean, here’s an example. There’s a great case, it’s in France. This family – this is just within the last few years – driving down the highway, a mother and two children in the back, they have an open-top car, during the day [on] a crowded highway. They see, over their head, through the window, craft. I mean, it’s obvious. And then the mother’s looking around and noticing that nobody else seems to see this. Okay? So the kids in the back have a camera phone, take a picture. When they get home, they take a look at the picture [and] there’s not a craft, but there’s an object, a small sort of star-shaped object about thirty or forty feet over their car.
GN: So, let’s say that that’s the object, but it projected an image of something else. And yet, that’s all they saw. So what happened? It’s sort of like it was a projected, 3D image of something, but it was only seen by them. So, when you start to hear many of these cases, and Jacques Vallée talks about this a lot…that whatever these things are, seem to have the ability to project altered reality into people’s minds. I know that sounds crazy. And I’m just repeating the stories and raised the thing…
TC: Well no crazier than any other thing that we’ve been talking about.
GN: Right.
TC: I mean, it’s all outside the bounds of what we understand the science anyway, right?
GN: Yeah. I mean… and I have the picture that they took of that star-shaped object, and the story. And Jacques had been the person who went and did the interviews for it. And that was sort of a mind bender for me. The first time that I had seen evidence of something that was different than what people had perceived, right? And so, this notion of a projected reality is something that really has to be part of the discussion at some point.
~~~
(If the phenomenon can make people see an object that’s not actually there, can they make one person see something and the person standing next to them see something else? Or nothing at all? Here’s an excerpt from a KLAS article on this subject. I believe the senior manager was Dr. Colm Kelleher and Nolan helped out with the immune-system analysis. ~Joe)
Statement from a Senior Manager of BAASS
One of the major successes of BAASS was in adopting the novel approach of utilizing the human body as a readout system for dissecting interactions with the UFO phenomenon. This novel approach aimed to circumvent the increasing evidence of deception and subterfuge by the UFO phenomenon in that multiple eyewitnesses co-located in the same vicinity frequently reported seeing widely different events. The evidence was multiplying that the UFO phenomenon was capable of manipulating and distorting human perception and therefore eyewitness testimony of UFO activity was becoming increasingly untrustworthy.
The BAASS approach was to view the human body as a readout system for UFO effects by utilizing forensic technology, the tools of immunology, cell biology, genomics and neuroanatomy for in depth study of the effects of UFOs on humans. This approach marked a dramatic shift away from the traditional norms of relying on eyewitness testimony as the central evidentiary arm in UFO investigations. The approach aimed to bypass UFO deception and manipulation of human perception by utilizing molecular forensics to decipher the biological consequences of the phenomenon.
The result of applying this new approach was a revolution in delineating the threat level of UFOs.
~~~
TC: So there have been, over centuries, many centuries, reports of livestock being killed, drained of blood, in conjunction with sightings of these objects.
GN: Right.
TC: Have you come across anything like that?
GN: I know of it and I know a woman, Linda Moulton Howe, who did a lot of these original studies.
~~~
~~~
I would recommend any interview with Dr. Colm Kelleher or Christopher O’Brien, or either book of theirs, if you want to delve into cattle mutilations. O’Brien is more mutilation-centric while Kelleher focuses a lot on the mad cow disease connection.
Click on either cover to buy and support my work.
~~~
~~~
~~~
1/2 From 2022 and a TC special…
This is one of the best segments you'll see on the work of Christopher O'Brien and his research into cattle mutilations. Some of the footage featuring O'Brien's field work is from his personal archives and had never been seen before.… pic.twitter.com/v4Cb8CBEJJ
GN: You know, again, its data. I don’t know why anything would want to do that. I really don’t. And I don’t know how it fits into the big picture of this because there’s so many moving parts, it’s very hard to create a consolidated story about it. And, you know, the only way that I can create a consolidated story is to say that there’s more than one thing here, right?
TC: Right.
GN: And that these things are somehow in tension with each other. I mean, much like when the colonial Europe went around the world, into Africa, and India, etc., and basically were fighting each other. You know, England, against Spain, and France, etc. Maybe that’s a little bit about what we’re seeing here…is that these things are in some kind of tension with each other, and that there is no unifying motivation.
TC: Is there evidence that there’s a lot of this kind of activity under sea?
GN: Yes. Yeah. I mean, plenty, right? The sonar images show these things moving at speeds a dozen times faster than our fastest submarines, with no cavitation, right? No, you know, no, basically bubbles behind them, because the movement would create a vacuum and would, you know, basically make a giant bubble and we’d get this noise. No noise, just sonar images.
TC: So, given your background in science, is that explicable?
GN: No, no, it’s not. No.
TC: Okay.
GN: You have to imagine a new kinds of physics. But interestingly, the physicists have come up with a unifying, let’s say, mathematics, for what these things might be doing and how they’re doing it.
TC: Huh. Does make sense to you?
GN: Yeah. Yeah, I mean, one of them is called…it’s, well, there’s actually a Mexican physicist, he has worked out the equations for a warp drive. I mean, we can’t do it. The amounts of energy required are extraordinary. It’s called the Alcubierre drive.
~~~
~~~
GN: But then there’s a number of other individuals who have then taken his equations, and shown that, yeah, that actually explains how these things might be moving.
TC: But there’s a lot of data from underwater?
GN: Correct. But, get that out of the Navy. And that’s part of what the announcement today was all about. This idea that Congress has said, “Enough is enough. We want the data. You’re not gonna hide this anymore. We’re going to give anybody in the entire DoD and intelligence community a secure channel by which you can actually report this. You can basically set aside the NDAs or oaths that you’ve given, because you’re basically reporting it to us, and it will be given to the Senate and the congressional leadership.”
TC: Right.
GN: And this is the first time ever that this has been done.
TC: It’s about time.
GN: So, I mean, if anybody wants to question whether this is something to pay attention to, you have to realize that these are the senators and Congresspeople who, behind closed doors, have seen the classified briefings, right? They’re the people who’ve seen this in a way…they’ve seen stuff I haven’t seen. And some of them come out, and their eyes are wide, about this.
GN: Yeah. You know, and I actually, briefly, I briefed Congressman Gallagher about this issue before he did the congressional hearings on it about the Wilson/Davis memo.
~~~
Rep. Gallagher pressed DoD officials on UAPs in the first public hearing on the topic in nearly 50 years.
GN: And, you know, these people are taking it seriously. And you have to!
TC: Amazing. So tell us about the the injuries. So, again, you’ve seen a hundred cases, what kinds of injuries have people sustained?
GN: I think the most dramatic are the…because we have MRIs, the things that you see within the body. And so, what we had done was, in looking at some of these MRIs, we had noticed damage in the brain, white matter disease, it’s called. If you know anybody, for instance, who’s had multiple sclerosis, and you look at an image of their brain, you’ll see these white matter objects.
~~~
~~~
GN: Yes, you can see it there (Experiencer graphic (below) from Tucker interview). Those white tracts there are just damage to the brain, right? Those are dead areas of the brain.
~~~
~~~
GN: And so, if you have that dead area of the brain, whatever that function might have been, is now gone, right? So memory, movement, etc., can all be affected. Now the brain can luckily rewire some things and so depending upon the extent of the damage, you can maybe get over it.
~~~
How to Rewire Your Brain After Trauma
~~~
GN: But, you know, the ones that you just saw on that image before, on the right, those are serious. And that was what essentially convinced me. But, what I asked for, of these people, I said, “Look, I’m not just going to believe you because you showed me images of these people. I want to meet the people.” And so, I was taken to meet the people and interview them, and I took their blood for later analysis. And so, you know, it was…seeing is believing and validation and verification. I did as much as I reasonably can. Now, they could be lying to me. I don’t know, but I doubt it because I saw some of the, sort of the consequences of their injuries…that you could sort of see how they were acting, etc.
TC: And did they describe the encounters that they had?
GN: Yeah, they did. And I shouldn’t talk about some of them because some of those people’s names have kind of become, you know, public. And so, sort of HIPAA rules really prevent from…
TC: Of course, but without identifying them, what kinds of encounters did they have?
GN: Uhh, objects on the ground (Landed? ~Joe) that were, you know, glowing, or, you know, moving too fast, or they were there and they got too close to it, and then it just disappeared.
~~~
~~~
GN: And then, afterwards, they get these radiation burns. Very often, some of them have been, basically, on the skin, you see a sclerosis of the skin…reddening, inflammation of the skin.
TC: Like at Nagasaki.
GN: Exactly! So, some sort of electromagnetic radiation, we imagine. But then, it’s goes deep enough into some of their bodies, if they got too close, that would cause lasting scarring within the body, which is not something you ever wanna have.
TC: Huh. And then, the brain injuries.
GN: Then the brain injuries. And the brain injuries were interesting because one of the things that we noticed in these individuals – and this is sort of a side study, which I’m working on with a group at Harvard – is we noticed that an area of the brain, the caudate putamen in many of these individuals was overdeveloped.
~~~
~~~
GN: And that’s a whole other story. But, basically, we figured out that this is an area where intuition happens, and a lot of these individuals who we had, were…it’s called them high functioning. You don’t get to be a pilot of an expensive craft without being reasonably smart and having intuition.
~~~
~~~
GN: And so, just a side benefit of studying this, allowed us to come up with a medical understanding of where cognition is happening in the brain, and we’re following up with that in a mainstream science way with a neurophysiology group at Harvard. And we’ve validated the original findings.
~~~
GN: But that was sort of an example of: Because we paid attention to anomalous data, we found an anomaly that really had nothing to do with the injury in the first place, but it told us something about what makes people intuitive and smart. And that is going off in a mainstream direction.
TC: That’s cool.
GN: Yeah.
TC: Was there consistency in symptoms?
GN: Yes. Yeah. I mean…
TC: What were some of the symptoms?
GN: Inflammation and nausea are the two most. I mean, if I irradiate you with a whole body of irradiation, you’re gonna get sick, you’re gonna throw up, you’re gonna – depending upon which organ system was, let’s say, most impacted directly – you’re gonna, basically, have problems with that. But the commonalities were the skin issues, and then some internal issues with the brain. When you see brain damage, that’s when people start paying attention. It’s hard to localize brain damage or damage in the rest of the body, you know, and associate it with something.
TC: Did you see consistent cognitive symptoms?
GN: No.
TC: Okay.
GN: No, just…I mean, again, it’s like in that image, depending upon where in the brain it happens, where the damage happened to be caused, that function associated with that part of the brain would be hurt.
TC: Yeah? Scary.
GN: Like arms not being able to move or, you know, walking, cognition…
TC: Memory loss, yeah. I don’t remember ever reading about any of the survivors of Nagasaki and Hiroshima suffering cognitive problems, brain damage.
TC: It’s such a great point, right? It’s exactly right. John Hersey? So, the injuries you saw are not inconsistent with, like, exposure to nuclear material?
GN: Correct. Yeah. And so, what that tells us is…I mean, at the very least, what I would say, is that, you know, let’s say in the next round of UAP directives from Congress, or from the Army, or the Air Force, is…stay away.
TC: (laughs loudly) Right! Stay away!
GN: You know?
TC: (laughing) If you see a glowing craft on the ground, don’t approach?
GN: Right. I mean, it seems obvious, but, you know, I mean, some of the people who I know were so intrigued by what they were seeing, they felt that they had to walk up and touch it because this couldn’t possibly be real. I mean, I would probably be in that category
Hal Puthoff (HP): In this room, most of the electromagnetic energy you can’t see. Why? Because it is in the infrared, in the form of heat. And there’s a very narrow band in the electromagnetic spectrum that you can see. And that’s what we call the visible spectrum. And then there are higher frequencies into the ultra-violent and beyond that we don’t see.
~~~
~~~
HP: Now it turns out that one of the side effects of engineering the spacetime metric, to get this kind of flight performance, is that itwe call itblueshifts the frequencies. All the frequencies that are involved, get moved to a higher frequency. It’s just built in to what the equations say, when you generate these anomalous effects. So what that means then, and it has significance for usis the infrared, we don’t ordinarily see, gets blue-shifted up into the visible. So when we hear that these craft are so bright and so luminous when you see them, it’s no surprise.
And then what was in the visible spectrum, gets shifted up into, let’s say, the ultraviolet. And so, if you get too close to one of these things that are powered up, you’ll get a sunburn, often reported by people who’ve claimed to have gotten close to a craft. And if you get too close, you might actually pick up some of the blue-shifted radiation from the visible that’s now blueshifted up into the soft x-ray region and get radiation poisoning. And there have been cases where that’s been reported.
[End Puthoff lecture excerpt]
~~~
[the_ad id=”1724″]
GN: You know? And so, you can kind of understand, but, I mean, I think that one of the directives is: Until we know what is going on, stay away. I mean, you know, for all…
TC: So put a warning label on UFOs?
GN: Yeah! Yeah. I would! I, you know… (TC laughs and GN joins in) Demand that they wear a seat belt!
TC: (Laughs loudly) Did any of the people you interviewed…I just can’t believe you’ve had this experience. I cannot…just to backtrack, I can’t believe you were (laughs loudly) at your office at Stanford the CIA shows up?
(Note: The pseudonym of “James” = Dr. Garry Nolan ~Joe)
The Visit
James’s reason for affiliating with the more public ufologists was to achieve a goal—to meet serious researchers of the phenomenon so he could carry on with his new research agenda. He needed a community of researchers who played by the rules of science and peer review. Soon after the much-publicized event, he met with success. The serious researchers actually came to him, but his introduction to them was extraordinary and frightening. The title of the television series Punk’d had become a part of everyday, ordinary vocabulary. Being “punk’d” by one’s friends meant that one was the butt of a practical joke while simultaneously being filmed and even streamed in real time online or, worse, on television. It was, to some, an honorary humiliation. James, who lived in a university town, was aware of the show and had seen a few of his friends get punk’d. When the men in black suits knocked on James’s office door, he opened it and stared into two very grim, unhappy faces. Who are these people? he wondered. The men asked if they could come in and talk to him about the artifact and “other things.” James wondered, “What have I gotten myself into this time?” He invited them into his office, and they accepted the invitation, not saying another word. The silence felt to James like a vague sort of threat. He made a joke to lighten the mood, but the men did not respond. After James offered them some water, he decided that he would match their cold demeanor.
“What is it that you want?” he asked.
“We want to know what you really found out about the artifact.”
“I already stated many times I can’t find any evidence it has an alien origin.” “We already know that. We want to know why you got involved and what else you might know.” After a moment passed, James came to the conclusion that he was most likely being punk’d. Amused, and ready for the charade to be revealed, he looked around for evidence of a camera or film crew. There was none. Hmm. With neither side knowing exactly what the other knew, there ensued one of the most interesting conversations of James’s life. One of the men turned out to be, like him, a top researcher at one of the world’s most renowned universities, but with a long association with intelligence agencies (I believe this is Dr. Kit Green. ~Joe). The other man was with a large aerospace firm (I believe this is Dr. Colm Kelleher ~Joe). What started as a disturbing encounter became a meeting of minds. The two visitors seemed grim and serious primarily because their own research into the phenomenon had proved to be very disturbing. They dealt with radiation effects and other biological interactions of the phenomenon with humans, a subject of which James knew nothing. As they talked, he realized that the serious researchers he’d been looking for had arrived, and they weren’t who he had thought they would be. Instead, they were very much like him and not public ufologists. They were not the “Men in Black.” They weren’t interested in publicity. But they were very interested in helping people who needed help. Over the next several months, his two (fully human) visitors exposed him to a nontraditional path that was as much a science as what he practiced at his “day job.” James had found his peers.
TC: And just turns your life in this amazing direction. But, umm, I wish that would happen to me. Did any of the people you interviewed see anybody in control of these craft? See any?
GN: Not in these injury cases, [but] I do know of cases, non-injury associated, where things were seen.
TC: What kind of things?
GN: Little beings (smiles). I don’t know what to say!
TC: I know it sounds crazy.
GN: I don’t know what to say!
TC: I just want you to tell me what the eyewitness accounts say. You’re not ratifying this.
GN: I’m not ratifying it. No, the eyewitnesses always talk about something about that tall, right?
~~~
~~~
GN: You know, they call them the Greys, I don’t know what to say.
TC: But with humanoid features?
GN: Humanoid features. Now, I have a problem with humanoid features because, you know, one of my backgrounds is evolutionary biology.
TC: Yes.
GN: And so, I don’t see the possibility of something else evolving on another planet that looks like us, you know? Unless God is intervening in very specific ways, almost anything…an octopus could become intelligent and fly around the Universe.
TC: Yes.
GN: So, I think that part of what we’re seeing here…I mean, look, if you’re an intelligence, are you going to go down on a planet with a bunch of angry monkeys who might kill you? No, unlikely. You’ll send some intermediary. Well, what kind of intermediary are you gonna send? You’re gonna send something that maybe almost looks like them, but isn’t them? So, I think, and this is, again, from inside the intelligence community, most of what we think we’re seeing are avatars, biological robots that are basically put there to be the minions, if you will.
TC: And that’s the current view of the intelligence community?
GN: That is a…it is a hypothesis. I mean, to me, if I were going to another place, or if I were going to study a native tribe of, let’s say, cannibals, maybe I wouldn’t show up in the middle of their village so that I don’t inadvertently become dinner.
TC: Yes.
GN: Right? So, you would send an intermediary first. But I’ve used this example, I don’t know if you know Lex Fridman, you probably know Lex Fridman. He’s an interviewer, he’s an AI scientist at Stanford. I did one with him.
~~~
~~~
GN: And using the example of the ants, as well. Let’s say that there was a race of intelligent ants at the bottom of your garden. How do you tell them about Instagram, right? How do you talk with them? How do you interact with them? You would probably make something that looked almost like an ant and you’d put it down there. But then how are you going to interact with them? Well, with pheromones, that’s how they talk. But you do something else, right? You’re speaking about whatever it is you talk about at the dinner table, but to translate down to their terms, you would have to use some sort of an intermediary. So, it’s kind of a lost in translation problem, right? You want to put something there that can interact with them so that they can know that there’s an object, but you, for instance, you’re not going to show up and put yourself in danger. I wouldn’t. I mean, we send drones. You understand what I mean?
TC: Of course. I’m tracking intently. I just wonder if this has changed your perspective.
GN: It’s changed everything. I look at everything now and wonder, what’s going on.
TC: But it also, sort of, by comparison, makes a lot of the things that we debate or fret about seem pretty small.
GN: Right. You know, and I think Ronald Reagan had a conversation with Gorbachev back in the days of the Cold War, where he said, at one point, “If aliens showed up, would you work with us against them, and drop the Cold War?” I mean, that was that’s a recorded statement.
~~~
2 Gorbachev: "[Reagan] said, 'We too.' So that's interesting," Gorbachev said to much laughter.
"[Gorbachev] then said to Shultz, 'I'm sorry for having interrupted you, but it was an interesting moment.'"https://t.co/aEaOa2L58a
One night in 1974, from a Cessna Citation aircraft, one of America’s most famous citizens saw a UFO.
There were four persons aboard the plane: pilot Bill Paynter, two security guards, and the governor of California, Ronald Reagan.
A week later Reagan recounted the sighting to Norman C. Miller, then Washington bureau chief for the Wall Street Journal. Reagan told Miller, “We followed it for several minutes. It was a bright white light. We followed it to Bakersfield, and all of a sudden to our utter amazement it went straight up into the heavens.” When Miller expressed some doubt, a “look of horror came over [Reagan]. It suddenly dawned on him . . . that he was talking to a reporter.” Immediately afterward, according to Miller, Reagan “clammed up.”
Reagan has not discussed the incident publicly since.
~~~
GN: So, basically what he was saying was: Something like this could bring us together. I mean, what law can you remember, in the last year or two, that has complete bipartisan support? This.
TC: Yes.
GN: Right? This has brought people together. And people say to me, “Well, why are you talking about it on this show or that show?” I said, “Because this is above politics.”
TC: Yes, it certainly is.
GN: It has to be. You know, and if we can’t talk about this in a non-political way, then why are we bothering with anything? We might as well just silo ourselves and build walls around everybody. That’s how I think about it.
TC: I couldn’t agree with you more. And it’s also inherently fascinating, but it raises a lot of questions, a lot of theological questions, also, people would say.
GN: Right! Yeah! Well, the Vatican is deeply involved (TC: Yes) in trying to understand this as well. And the Vatican has already come out and said, “If there are aliens, they can also be children of God, right? (TC: Yes) There’s no reason they can’t be. There’s no reason we can’t treat them as, you know, as humans, if you will, even though they might not be, right? That we need to treat them as equals, because…why not? They have no problem with it. And this is more, I mean, especially if you speak more with the Jesuits, right? The Jesuits are a little bit more amenable to this kind of thing. But the Vatican has come right out and said it. End of story.
TC: Well, they have their own observatory, I believe.
GN: Yeah. And, you know, there are rumors of stuff that’s deep in the Vatican library that a good friend of mine, who you might want to eventually have on a show like this, is Diana Pasulka at the University of North Carolina. She’s a comparative religion professor. Fascinating work.
~~~
~~~
[the_ad_placement id=”content”]
GN: When you start asking the question: How will the admission that we are not at the top of the food chain anymore, change all the religions, right? Because one of the first questions that somebody’s going to ask is, “Okay, well, if they do show up and want to talk with us, who is their God? How do they see…
TC: Great question.
GN: And then, everybody, every other religion will be looking for anything that anything like this says, for a mirror of what they believe in. And that will just start a whole new series of arguments. So that is yet another thing, or another reason why the government might feel a little, you know, hesitancy about bringing this kind of information forward.
TC: Oh, it’s inherently destabilizing.
GN: Yeah.
TC: Yeah. Sure, because if the U.S. military is not the most powerful force in the Universe, then it kind of…
GN: Then we’re…yeah.
TC: (laughs) [It] resets your expectation!
GN: Then the populace might, you know, might, you know, revolt (laughs).
TC: So, how are you treated at Stanford?
GN: Uhh, you know, I think, five, six years ago, there was a fair amount of giggling about it, but I, you know, I mean, luckily, I have, you know, frankly, a really good reputation as a serious scientist. I mean, like I said, I’ve commercialized a lot of the things so I…and the stuff we do is, you know, cutting edge. I don’t want to pat myself on the back too much. But, umm, it’s cutting edge. And this is actually what’s brought over some people, is: “If Garry thinks this is real, maybe we should be paying attention to it.” Well, here’s an example. So I’ll go give a talk in Boston, and you know, a bunch of professors will take me out to dinner. Inevitably, after one drink, this question comes up. And not to make fun of me, but to have a serious conversation. And almost inevitably, one of the group has said, “Yeah, well, I saw something when I was a kid,” right? Or one of them comes up to me afterwards and says, “Garry, you know (mumbles)…this,” right? So, if you give people permission in a place where they will not be ridiculed, you have a much more open conversation about a subject matter that’s so important. And for many people, you call them experiencers if you see something like that. I mean, I saw something when I was very young, when I was twelve, as a paperboy. Went right over my head.
GN: Hartford Courant!. Exactly! Exactly (laughs). And [I was] going from one street to another, through the woods, and this…I saw the lights – it was like March – the tree branches, and my shadow in front of me. And then the shadow started moving and I looked up and this object went – I mean, right at that level of the top of the trees – went right over my head, with lights shining down. I could kind of see the outline of something round. No sign…
TC: How big was it?
GN: Probably thirty, forty feet across.
TC: Wow.
GN: And…I mean, it was unmistakable. I wasn’t dreaming, I wasn’t asleep, etc. But, I didn’t call it a UFO, I didn’t know what it was. I just didn’t know what it was. And it wasn’t until a decade or so later when, you know, you start seeing movies, “Close Encounters of the Third Kind,” that kind of stuff. I thought, “Is that what I saw?” You look back, retrospectively, and say…
TC: But you never forgot it.
GN: I never forgot. No, it’s one of those moments and thank you…that was actually the point I was trying to get to. When you see something like that, you never forget it, it changes your life, I hate to call it…it’s almost like a spiritual experience. This is what Diana Pasulka writes about, that professor I told you about. And not that I’m not Christian or I’m one thing or another. It’s changes your life in a way that it puts things in perspective. So when you hear other people’s stories about this stuff, I feel inherently like I want to protect them. I want to help them not be attacked for something that they saw, because it’s wrong, first of all, that they shouldn’t be.
TC: It’s absolutely wrong.
GN: So you should…I sort of feel like we need to give people that open space. Some of them might be delusional. Perfectly fine. But a lot of them are not. As you said, at the beginning of the show, that there’s any of a number of people who are otherwise credible, who are absolutely dead focused on this now. And so, you know, through the efforts of Lue Elizondo, and Chris Mellon, and many others on the inside that, unfortunately, will not ever be known in the roles that they’ve played to bring this forward, they have given a level of credibility to this that has opened the area up for all kinds of people to move in. I mean, the National Association of Aerospace Engineers (I believe he meant – American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) now has a committee on this. It’s a 50,000-strong, or so, union of scientists, right?
~~~
~~~
NASA has come out and said – you probably have seen this – that they’re studying it, right? They’re saying this is worth study. And they use the same language that we’ve been pushing: It’s data, it’s science…scientists should be interested in things that they don’t understand, and we shouldn’t take anything off the table. It doesn’t mean you…
TC: (laughing as he says it) Scientists should be interested in things they don’t understand. That’s the whole point!
GN: That’s the whole point of it!
TC: (laughs) So that leads to the bigger and very obvious question, which is: How can we have a society in which many people have first-hand experience of these things, in which mountains of data exist, proving that there’s something there that we don’t understand, and yet there’s still this social sanction levied against anyone who mentions it?
GN: Right.
TC: What is that?
GN: Well, I mean, it was directed misinformation and disinformation.
The Panel’s concept of a broad educational program integrating efforts of all concerned agencies was that it should have two major aims: training and “debunking.” The training aim would result in proper recognition of unusually illuminated objects (e.g., balloons, aircraft reflections) as well as natural phenomena (meteors, fireballs, mirages, noctilucent clouds). Both visual and radar recognition are concerned. There would be many levels in such education from enlisted personnel to command and research personnel. Relative emphasis and degree of explanation of different programs would correspond to the categories of duty (e.g., radar operators; pilots; control tower operators; Ground Observer Corps personnel; and officers and enlisted men in other categories). This training should result in a marked reduction in reports caused by misidentification and resultant confusion.
The “debunking” aim would result in reduction in public interest in “flying saucers” which today evokes a strong psychological reaction. This education could be accomplished by mass media such as television, motion pictures, and popular articles. Basis of such education would be actual case histories which had been puzzling at first but later explained. As in the case of conjuring tricks, there is much less stimulation if the “secret” is known. Such a program should tend to reduce the current gullibility of the public and consequently their susceptibility to clever hostile propaganda. The Panel noted that the general absence of Russian propaganda based on a subject with so many obvious possibilities for exploitation might indicate a possible Russian official policy.
Members of the Panel had various suggestions related to the planning of such an educational program. It was felt strongly that psychologists familiar with mass psychology should advise on the nature and extent of the program. In this connection, Dr. Hadley Cantril (Princeton University) was suggested. Cantril authored “Invasion from Mars,” (a study in the psychology of panic, written about the famous Orson Welles radio broadcast in 1938) and has since performed advanced laboratory studies in the field of perception. The names of Don Marquis (University of Michigan) and Leo Roston were mentioned as possibly suitable as consultant psychologists. Also, someone familiar with mass communications techniques, perhaps an advertising expert, would be helpful. Arthur Godfrey was mentioned as possibly a valuable channel of communication reaching a mass audience of certain levels.
End Excerpt from The Robertson Panel
~~~
GN: And so, one of the things, you might want to look at the language of the new bill that just came out today, literally. Lue sent it to me, you know, with exclamation points, saying, “We want you to catalog – you the intelligence services – all the attempts at obfuscation and disinformation, of the U.S. public that you have been doing…
~~~
Here’s the actual NDAA language…
“…for the period beginning on January 1, 1947, and ending on the date on which the Comptroller General completes activities under this subsection, compile and itemize a complete historical record of the intelligence community’s involvement with unidentified aerospace-undersea phenomena, including successful or unsuccessful efforts to identify and track unidentified aerospace-undersea phenomena, and any intelligence community efforts to obfuscate, manipulate public opinion, hide, or otherwise provide unclassified or classified misinformation about unidentified aerospace-undersea phenomena or related activities, based on the review conducted under paragraph (1).”
~~~
TC: Beginning with Roswell.
GN: Beginning with Roswell. 1947, right? Actually, there was a case two years before Roswell, but that is not really very well known.
TC: Where was that?
GN: Trinity, actually. It was just very close to Roswell.
TC: Trinity, New Mexico,
GN: New Mexico, yeah. Interesting case.
~~~
~~~
[the_ad id=”1724″]
GN: But, you know, the reason why that’s important is because, you know, people’s lives were ruined, right? People’s careers were derailed. And it’s not that we need to go back and fix all of that, and, you know, come up with some kind of, you know, monetary compensation for those individuals. But I think, visa vie, the PTSD issue, sometimes people just want to know that when they were called crazy, that somebody finally says, “You weren’t.”
TC: Of course.
GN: But going forward, now, I mean, we might not be able to fix the past, but let’s not recreate the past moving forward.
TC: And the trust is worth telling for its own sake.
GN: Yeah.
TC: It’s a virtue to tell the truth, period.
GN: And, you know, it’s interesting, I think. You know, I go around, and I will talk to people about this issue. So many people have not heard about this, that it kind of surprises me in a way because, you know, I would be interested in it. But then I realized, if it isn’t affecting the bread and butter issues at their table every day, why should they care, right? And so, you know, I think that those of us who are in the middle of it, need to realize that we do live in a bit of a bubble, and that the rest of the world is trying to just survive. And whether or not there are aliens or whatever, it’s not going to change…when it changes their lives, then they might pay attention, right? So, I mean, it is still something which the public finds fascinating, and, you know, if you do a public survey of it, if you were to list that amongst the things that: Do you think this is interesting? People would check, “Yes, it’s interesting.” But they aren’t actively going out and seeking answers yet. Except it’s begun now to open up to the point where the government has said, “Yes, it’s okay.” Now scientists are saying, “Okay, it’s okay now.” All the people who were kind of in the closet are now coming out and saying…
TC: But it’s been almost eighty years! And even before that, I mean, pilots throughout the Second World War, they called them Foo Fighters, as you know.
GN: Yes, right.
~~~
~~~
TC: So what we’re seeing is this entire edifice of lies starting to crack.
GN: Right.
TC: And clearly, it’s coming down. But, you know, that disinformation manufactured by propagandists in the U.S. government has been taken as truth for generations.
GN: Right, right.
TC: So, knowing that…and that’s true, we know that.
GN: Yeah.
TC: Does it get you reassessing anything else we think we know?
GN: Uh…yes, in some ways (laughs).
TC: (laughs) Like, if they lied about it, what else did they lie about?
GN: But I’m not sure I want to say it here.
TC: (laughs) Okay, That’s a…I totally get it. But the answer, “Yes,” is enough. So it has?
GN: Yes, yes. I think that the nature of our reality is yet to be fully understood (GN smiles and TC laughs). I think that there’s a lot of things that people think are fringe that appear to have some evidence. And my interest, frankly, has been: Can I place this fringe object in the mainstream of science, right? Can I come up with some kind of explanation about how this weird stuff people think is happening, can be real, right? Not that I have to believe it, but what I want to do is place it into our physics or find a bridge and a connection to it, so that we can explain it. Now, what’s good about all of these things is that money now is starting to appear, right? I mean, New Jersey actually now put out a postdoctoral fellowship for people to study UAPs. The state of New Jersey, right?
GN: I’m involved with, you know, trying to set up resources to be able to fund researchers for this kind of stuff. Because, you know, scientists inherently will follow the money. I can’t take my NIH dollars and go study UFOs, right? I mean, I have a certain box I have to stay in. But I do have money from an endowed chair that I have, which I can do anything I want with. It’s $400,000 a year. And I have talked to the donors, and they’re fine with me using some of this to study UFOs, right? So I have the money to do it. I also spent a lot of money on my own pocket on it. But now that there is going to be, let’s say, validation, you know, the National Science Foundation could get involved. Lockheed might want to.
TC: Yes.
GN: One of the things that’s actually in this new bill is calling for…I think they use the word, “A cadre of academics and scientists who would advise the intelligence agencies on all of these issues.” Not just UAPs, but other things. For the first time! Because there are so many barriers for this. But one of the things that…I wrote a white paper for some of these committees, and I called for that. I said, “You need to bring the scientists in.” Not that we know better than anybody else, because most scientists can actually be dorks (laughs). It’s because you want that outside opinion, you want the crazy opinion, because you just want it on the table, sometimes, because it might be true.
TC: Yes!
GN: And, you know, when you do have a decision to make, you don’t want it to be a political decision, at some level. You want it to be science, and you want to use the best science to inform the politics and the policymakers so that they have the information at their disposal. But, we don’t have it yet. So, now we do, now it’s starting to come. And it’s literally in the bill today that says we will now try to establish and find ways to bring scientists on board, in secure manners, right? With classified access. Because, I don’t want to give it to the Chinese. And I certainly don’t want to give it to the Russians.
TC: Yes.
GN: Right? So, obviously, this information has to be vetted, whatever we might learn. But then at some level, though, you need to get the information out to academics because the silo approach of the last eighties years has not worked. Having one piece of it at Lockheed, having another piece of it over here, another piece of it over there, they can’t talk to each other, right? By definition of how these things are set up. That isn’t how a laboratory works. That isn’t how science works. I need to know all this other stuff.
TC: Of course.
GN: And so, we need to find a way to declassify enough things so that the collective smarts of the country can come to bear on it, to hopefully use it. I mean, I come back to, constantly: If there’s something here, can we use it, and can we take advantage of it? Well, first for the country, and then for the planet. That’s just my interest. That’s always been my approach to life.
TC: I think the most heartening part of this conversation, not only has it been fascinating, but, is the confirmation that science still exists, scientific thinking, the open mindedness that science requires still exists. It’s not all just superstition.
GN: Right.
TC: And reflexive, political orthodoxy. So anyway, I’m grateful that you’re doing this. I’m grateful you’re taken so seriously at Stanford, and above all, I appreciate your telling us all this.
As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.
“Then it moves to the starboard side, right across, and they scurry across the ship. And they’re kind of, you know, going through wherever they need to go to get to the other side. And they maintain eyes on it, because they’re just shocked at what they’re seeing. And then, probably the most dramatic part of the of the event was…once it moved to the starboard side of the ship, it just shot straight up into the air. And the word that the sailor that we spoke with used was, ‘It just zoomed, it zoomed, it zoomed straight up in the air.”
~John “Guts” Gutierrez
~~~~
If you like what you see on my blog, my Twitter and YouTube Channeland appreciate the time and effort, here are links to my Patreon, Pay Pal and Venmo. I appreciate any and all support. Without that support, I would struggle to do this as much as I do.
John “Guts” Gutierrez is an active duty Navy Commander having served for 17 years, initially as a helicopter pilot deployed all over the world, and credentialed as an Aviation Safety Officer. He’s a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis and has a personal passion for the UAP mystery. In this episode of WEAPONIZED, Jeremy & George talk with John about his life and personal perspective on the current, global UAP mystery. They also talk in-depth about the now famous UFO swarm event series that occurred off the coast of California in 2019. This is a case now widely known due to Jeremy’s & George’s reporting on the events. This dramatic UFO event series included 10 Navy warships that were brazenly swarmed by over 100 Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs). For the first time ever – we get to hear what really happened – directly from two military eyewitnesses tasked with responding to the incursions within United States restricted airspace.
• • •
WEAPONIZED would like to make clear that John is not speaking in any official capacity. He is not representing the U.S. Navy, the DoD or U.S. Government. All views and opinions expressed throughout the podcast by John [and by the anonymous service members] are strictly his/their own – and in no way represent the official position of the U.S. Navy, DoD or U.S. Government.
~ ~ ~
Jeremy Corbell (JC): “This is my good friend, John, who you know. We’ve known each other a long time, John.”
John Gutierrez (Guts): “We have, we have.”
JC: “I’m really excited that we’re able to talk.”
Guts: “Yeah, man.”
JC: “You know, officially, like, on camera, you know, on audio, for people to kind of learn about you, our friendship, that kind of thing. So, can you tell me, John, a little bit about yourself.”
Guts: “So, I’m an active-duty, Navy Commander. I’ve been in for about 17 years. Originally, as a helo pilot, is my background. So I definitely have experience in the aviation community. But, you know, I’ve been deployed all over the world, obviously got a chance to meet you along the way. And just just happy to be here.”
George Knapp (GK): “Can you give us a sense of how you got interested in the UFO topic, and how that led to a friendship with Jeremy?”
Guts: “Sure, absolutely. You know, lifelong interest, starting as a kid. Wanted to be an astronaut, you know, I guess, like every other kid, but as I got older, that was kind of like, a real goal. And so, that’s eventually how I ended up at the Naval Academy. We can get into that a little bit later, if we want. But lifelong interest, kind of starting with the astronaut aspirations. Turns out, it’s really hard to be an astronaut, by the way (GK laughs). Definitely, they take the cream of the crop for that group. But, you know, kind of, throughout my life, there were always these kind of figures growing up, adults in my life, that, you know, they took the topic seriously. Really, any topic, you know? My mom’s from Central America, and we’d go visit, you know, every summer, growing up. There’s a lot to be said for sitting around a table as a kid, with a bunch of adults around you, having serious discussions about maybe some, you know, call it paranormal topics. And as a kid that made a big impression on me, you know? To hear, you know, my aunt bringing up a story of, you know, ‘Hey, so and so saw something the other night that looked really weird.’ And instead of dismissing it, you know, outright or people snickering or laughing, it’s like, ‘Oh, really?’ And, you know, just having having serious discussions about it. Same thing, you know, my dad was one of the first ones that ever mentioned, you know, Area 51, and the possibility of what’s out in the desert, you know? But again, not, in a joking way, just kind of taking it seriously, you know?
“And then, of course, there were some, you know…I’m a child of the nineties so, I’m definitely…there was some big pop culture influences on me. X-Files was a big one. And even that, you know, we’d have a family friend come over, a former military guy, a former Marine, and we’d watch an episode of X-Files. And at the end of it, you know, he goes, ‘You know, there’s little bit of kernel of truth in that episode.’ And he’d go into a whole thing about the kernel of truth behind that particular episode. And then, of course, for me, you know, listening to Coast to Coast, you know, which I’m sure you’re familiar with. But, growing up, my dad owned and operated a family restaurant in my hometown. If I wasn’t playing football, or getting in trouble with my friends, I was working, you know, I was working at the restaurant. And, you know, Friday, Saturday nights, we’d be up late, trying to shut things down and go home. And by the time we’d get out of the restaurant, on Friday and Saturday nights, you know, it’s eleven, twelve o’clock at night. And my dad would drive me home, you know, a twenty, thirty-minute drive to the house or whatever, and he’d flip on the radio. And the only think to listen to that’s worth listening to at that hour is a show like Coast. And so, you know, kind of those, again, people trying to have, you know, serious discussions about topics that maybe would be considered unorthodox, or, you know, kind of on the fringes. And then, eventually, I never suspected that what would eventually be my professional career would come crashing so closely with my personal passions and interests, you know? But they definitely have, you know, in a big way, so.”
JC: “So kind of listening to George on Coast to Coast was really, as a kid, the way that you, like me, kind of got this on your radar through family and just, you know, in the zeitgeist, just listening to the radio.
Guts: “Yeah. absolutely. And again, just listening to serious people have serious discussions about it. When you’re a kid, you kind of look to those around you to see, well what’s their reaction like, are they taking it seriously, are they laughing, are they not? Luckily for me, the way I was raised, my parents were always very open minded and kind of accepted of what people brought to us. Obviously, with a discerning eye, always. Even though it’s been a personal passion/interest, I’d like to think that I’m somebody who’s taken it seriously and tried to sort the wheat from chaff, as they say. It’s hard. It’s hard to kind of shift through all the noise and all the scatter that’s out there. But boy, I think when you can do that and do it successfully, I think it goes a long way.”
GK: “So as you pursue your naval career, you rise through the ranks. And it’s obviously not on your front burner, thinking about UFOs.”
Guts: “No, no.”
GK: “Maybe in the back of your mind. At what point do you cross paths with Jeremy and how do you begin a conversation with him?”
Guts: “Let me say, first, too: I’m not here on behalf of the Navy, or I’m not here representing the Navy in any way. It happens to be my career and my profession, which I’m very thankful for and I’m proud of my service, and I wouldn’t change a single thing. You know, the Navy’s been good to me and my family, and I’m married with three young kids and everything we have I owe to the Navy. But in that sense, I’m not here with my Navy hat on, it just happens to be my job. So, please don’t take anything that I’m saying…it’s just my opinion.”
GK: “Yeah, absolutely because it’s a good point.”
Guts: “Yeah, no, it’s just my opinion and I think it’s important, when it’s appropriate, to hear from folks that may have either had experiences or just kind of help the public understand, kind of the military perspective. Because it’s hard. There’s a lot of jargon, there’s a lot of nuance, there’s a lot of the military culture. Unfortunately, a lot of what people know, is just what they see in the movies and on TV. And that’s part of it. But the reality is a little bit different.
“But with Jeremy, we met back in 2015, I think it was. Actually, I think it was a little before the summer of 2014, let’s say. I was listening to Coast, and I had heard that an individual by the name of Bob Lazar was going to be coming out for the first time in a long time, to a certain conference out in Arizona.
~~~
~~~
Guts: “Like I said, it’s the summer of 2014, I think the conference was in February of 2015. So that kind of piqued my interest, obviously, right? I listened to that show and I’d always known kind of who Bob was, and was familiar with his story.
Guts: “But I had a friend of mine, who will go unnamed. But another good buddy of mine, active-duty guy. A submariner. But this is a guy that I’ve known for over twenty years now, someone that I trust my life with. And I knew that he was a big Bob Lazar fan, let’s call him. And by fan, I mean, you know, again, someone who was interested in the story, but even more so, you know, really tried to follow the story and try to, you know, try to follow the details to make heads or tails of…is it’s true what he’s really saying, you know?
“So I knew that my buddy was very interested in the Bob Lazar story. I knew that he was going to be on deployment at the time that Bob had decided to come out, to agree to do the conference. So I said, well, what the hell, I’ve had a lifelong interest in this stuff. I’ve never been to a conference myself, up until that point. And at the time, I was stationed in San Diego, and I go, ‘Well, Arizona’s not too far.’ So, pack up the kids and the wife and, ‘We’re going in the desert to hear people talk about UFOs and to listen to Bob.’ So we get there, and I think I came across you (Corbell) at…you had a booth set up or whatever. And at the time, I think you had a little 10-12 minute clip of Bob that people…again, no one had really heard from him in that way that you had put him out, up until that point. And I think I came up to you and said, ‘Hey man, how much for a signed, Bob Lazar poster?’ Because I really wanted it for my buddy. That’s really what it was. The whole impetus for that was just, I thought it’d be really cool as a homecoming gift for him. You know, being out on deployment, you know, submarine duty is tough. So I kind of wanted something nice for him to come home to and and be able to provide him, ‘Hey, check out what I got for you!’ And no, it wasn’t even for me. So I think that was kind of the start.”
JC: “Yeah, yeah, it’s funny man. You came up and I didn’t know what to do because I had only printed these posters because people were gonna kill me if I didn’t have something from the little short film, interview thing. And so, finally, I think we met up later that night, and you were like, ‘This is for my buddy and he’s gonna be so stoked.’ Who now, I know, and I’m friends with as well. But that was just kind of cool, that was the first way that we met. It’s kind of funny, like, you know, you’re (Knapp) reporting and with Bob, brings all these people together. We struck up a friendship, and he (Guts) came out to my place out in Pioneertown and it just kind of started from there.”
Guts: “Absolutely, I think at the time, we exchanged emails. And I remember, it’s funny, you were very gracious.”
JC: “Okay, good.”
Guts: “You were very gracious and you weren’t putting on any airs or anything, and real easy to talk to and get along with. And you told me, ‘Yeah, let’s keep in touch.’ I [was thinking], this guy’s…whatever, he’s pulling my leg.”
GK: “I think it’s important…we’re gonna delve into some really cool areas, sensitive materials and incidents. But I think it’s important to say…”
Guts: “Nothing too sensitive (smiles).”
GK: “Yeah, of course. Within limits. We’ll push it as hard as we can (JC and Guts laugh). Whatever we can get away with. It’s important, I think, as people are watching or listening at home, and are assuming, ‘Well, if he’s friends with Jeremy, maybe this is the guy that’s leaking stuff, images and things like that?’”
Guts: “Oh no, no. No, no, no, no.”
GK: “You should make that clear about the nature of your relationship.”
Guts: “Sure. Let me make it abundantly clear: No, I am not Jeremy’s source on anything that he’s put out. I take my job seriously, I’m able to keep my personal passions and, like I said, my professional obligations and duties, keep those two worlds separate. You have to…especially with this job and the world of security clearances and things like that. You have to be able to do that. As an aviator, they train us to compartmentalized a lot of stuff to be able to go fly. So, maybe for someone like me, or a fellow aviator, it’s a little more inherent to be able to do that, because they train you to do that. So kind of keeping those worlds separate is paramount. As close as we are, I would never violate the sanctity of any…”
GK: “And you’re cognizant of that, too, Jeremy. He’s your friend. You don’t want to put him in a position where he gets in trouble.”
JC: “I would never do that. And to kind of push that…so people really understand: For me, with Guts, is, he’s a rational-minded person that has experience as an aviator, long military career, an active, Navy commander. All of this is a perspective that is real important to some of the stuff that you and I are looking at. So, what I’ll do, over the years, is I’d be like, ‘Hey man, I got this witness, they’re coming at me with this story or something. Can I verify…did they go to the Annapolis Naval Academy with you?’ Just in general. Like, is this a real person? What does this word mean? What should I be thinking about? Just basic stuff is how I come to – well I call him Guts, which is his call sign – John, right? The basic thing that I’ll do is utilize his basic expertise to help me sort what I’m looking at. Now, it’s gotten much deeper over the years and he’s seen some of the stuff that we’ve obtained & released to the public. I mean, I’ve never, ever…first of all, I’ll just put it right out there: It’s not a source, and you know that, but, I mean, just publicly, something has to be vetted over and over and over. I have to receive something three or four times to feel that it is valid, and then to go in and look at it. You’ve never asked me, and I’ve never talked to you about sources, which I think is important to kind of…”
Guts: “Yeah, no…absolutely. To the contrary of your (Knapp) point of, you know, feeding stuff to Jeremy. Absolutely not. I’ve never done anything like that. On the contrary, I’ve been…I don’t know what the right word is…genuinely shocked, surprised, impressed, however you want to put it, of the sources that you do have & maintain. I have no idea who they are. Kind of like you would never put me in that position, I would never put you in that position, either. I don’t wanna know. But, again, as someone who takes it seriously, as someone who has a passion for…certainly the world of aviation safety, that’s kind of the angle that I’m coming at it from. I certainly have an interest [in] the stuff that you put out.”
[the_ad id=”1724″]
JC: “First of all, the Pentagon has confirmed that what we released was actual Navy film footage. I mean, is it okay to ask you: Were you aware of this material after seeing George and I release it?”
Guts: “There were a couple of things that you guys had put out that I had been previously aware of. Yeah, absolutely. So, when I saw it again, in the form that you put it out, it was like, ‘Whoa, okay.’”
GK: “You’re glad it comes out.”
Guts: “Yeah, it adds a certain level of credibility or validity to the products that you guys put out. It’s real.”
GK: “Five years, we’ve seen such a dramatic change in how the topic is regarded by mainstream media, Congress is looking at it, the public is energized. I mean, it’s an amazing about face and transformation of events I never thought I would see. But, I’m curious: In private conversations, you’ve told us, the Navy is global, it’s a big place, but it’s also a small place. Can you give us a sense of, during these five years of tumultuous change and so much public attention on the UFO issue and questions, is it discussed among your colleagues? Is it something that you talk about on a regular basis?”
Guts: “Well, it is and it isn’t. It kind just depends on who you talk to. All my buddies, sure, I’m the Fox Mulder of the squadron. Oh, UFO stuff? Talk to Guts. It is and it isn’t. Certainly, 2017 was a big year. When someone like Commander Fravor comes out and shares his story, that’s a big deal. It’s a really big deal. Someone like Chad Underwood, that you’ve talked to. When they come out and provide their story, it’s a big deal. Ryan Graves and all the rest.”
~~~
JC: “For people who don’t about this stuff, right? So, you’re talking about Commander David Fravor and Commander Chad Underwood. Commander David Fravor was the guy that chased a UFO for the United States military, famously called the Tic Tac UFO incident. Which is now famous because the NYT and everything…the interviews George and I did with Dave Fravor, and also with Commander Underwood. He’s the guy that filmed the Tic Tac UFO. So we have a witness report from a pilot who was the head of the Black Aces, then you got somebody who he sends out to film this UFO, and films it.”
Part 1 – Fravor interviewed by Knapp and Corbell
~~~
Part 2 – Fravor interviewed by Knapp and Corbell
~~~
Chad Underwood, the man who filmed the Tic Tac UFO, interviewed by Corbell
~~~
JC: “And it’s FLIR footage that’s put out to the world. So, for people who don’t know, that’s what we’re talking about. When I first I told you I was talking with a Navy commander who chased a UFO, what was your reaction?”
Guts: “Oh, it’s bullshit, it’s total bullshit. I didn’t believe you, man. And again, that kind of goes back to the whole sorting wheat from the…you gotta have a good bs meter. I don’t have to tell you that. You really gotta have a good bs meter with all this stuff. When you first mentioned that you had somebody of the status of Commander Fravor, I didn’t believe it. That’s too good to be true. It’s a perfect witness, when you think about it.”
JC: “Why?”
Guts: “Well, and like I’ve told you before, privately, I wish people, I wish the general public more inherently understood the quality of the caliber of witness, the quality of witness that a guy like Commander Fravor is. Why? Number one, he’s an aviator, so I gotta, you know, I’m biased towards that. Listen, he’s a jet jock. He’s as close to the real-life Maverick, Tom Cruise, that you’re gonna get in real life. He’s the CO (Commanding Officer) of his own jet squadron, The Black Aces, that deploys around the world. Which again, in our world, there’s no one above that, obviously. He’s a Naval Academy graduate. He’s a Top Gun graduate. I believe he was an instructor but don’t quote me on that. But again, this is somebody that, when they speak, people should listen and take what they’re saying seriously.
“And so, do people talk about it? Yeah, but it’s not prolific. Even today, you’ll come across active-duty folks, ‘Have you ever heard of Commander Fravor?’ And they’ll go, ‘Who’s that?’ I go, ‘How the hell do you not know about that?’ So look, we do talk…at least my perspective is it’s not a dirty little secret or anything like that. If people wanna talk about it, they talk about it. Which is great, because another reason why I would agree to come on and do something like this…there’s stigma with this stuff. There’s been a stigma for a long time and I think we’re turning a corner…it feels like it. But there’s still a lot of work to be done.”
JC: “How does that show up in your, kind of, line of work. How does the stigma to unidentified flying objects and pilots having to deal with that? Near misses, should we engage or should we not? How does stigma show up in your field?”
Guts: “Well the way it comes up is, it’s kind of, those who have had an experience and those who haven’t, right? For the guys that have run into this stuff on a daily basis, for them it’s real.”
JC: “And they have?”
Guts: “And they have. That’s a fact.”
JC: “Pilots are running into unidentified flying objects on a daily basis. They’re seeing them, picking them up on radar?”
Guts: “That’s a fact, okay? For them, it’s real, and stigma be damned. Because you can’t tell a guy, something that just flew by your cockpit at fifty feet away from you…you can’t deny that. The way the stigma shows up is for those who haven’t [had these experiences], who aren’t interested in this stuff and who don’t understand the aviation safety aspects associated with UAP. And so, that’s kind of why I classify it that way. Those who have had the experiences and those who haven’t. And for those who haven’t, it’s just hard for them to wrap their mind around it. It’s still a big mystery. We don’t know what this stuff is.”
GK: “2017, Jeremy and I were able to break the story of the Tic Tac, twice, on Coast to Coast, months before it came out in the New York Times. And because of how Jeremy treated Fravor with respect, that word gets around. It helps cultivate other sources and it’s served both of us really well. When that story comes out, though, it leads to changes in the Navy. I mean. the Navy comes out and says, ‘We wanna make it easier for our aviators and other service members to go ahead and report this stuff when it happens, so that there’s less stigma attached, it’s not gonna hurt your career.’ The Navy has lead the charge. I wanna know if this is a source of pride for you, when you compare it to, say, the Air Force. Which, I’ll just say it, they’re flat out dragging their butts on this stuff.”
You wouldn't know that from their silence, but the U.S. Air Force has tracked thousands of unidentified aerial phenomena incidents from 2004 to 2021. Former DoD Intel chief, @ChrisKMellon, calls out the Air Force for their involvement with UAP. https://t.co/z9wOAJaJs3
GN: “They’ve been uncooperative with Congress, with the UAP Task Force. You know that they’re sitting on a big pile of information that they’re not sharing, and they’ll have to be dragged kicking and screaming. The Navy, at least, ostensibly, is much more cooperative. Are you proud of that, the Navy doing that?”
Guts: “Without question. Obviously, yeah, I’m biased towards the naval service. But, I am proud. I’m proud of the way that we have tried to tackle this topic, because there’s a real concern out there. We got guys in the air, coming across things that we don’t know what they are, and the risk for a near, mid-air collision, or God forbid, an actual, mid-air collision, is there. It’s really there. And the fact that the Navy has tried to implement, maybe, easier reporting procedures or guidelines to make it okay for pilots not to be afraid to say, ‘Hey, you know, I saw this thing, I don’t know what it is, but I almost hit it.’”
[the_ad_placement id=”content”]
JC: “Have you seen that change? I mean, now, is it easier to report it? Because I remember, you were looking: When are the new commandments coming down on how to report this?”
Guts: “From personal experience, from my perspective as a helo (helicopter) guy, I don’t think it trickled down to our level, necessarily, because maybe we weren’t, necessarily, the type of platform that was encountering this stuff on a daily basis. But again, if u talk to guys on East Coast, based out of Oceania, certainly the paradigm has shifted for guys like that for sure.”
JC: “And you’ve directly talked with a lot of these guys?”
Guts: “Absolutely, absolutely. So yeah, for guys like them, it was definitely a noticeable change. Was it fleet-wide? I can’t speak to that. I don’t really have an opinion on that. But the fact that, like you said, George, the fact that the Navy did at least seem to be taking the lead on it, absolutely, it’s a point of pride for me. I won’t bash my other brothers and sisters in the other services but I can’t speak to what their plans are, what their intentions are with all this stuff. But there have been some glaring silences, if I can classify it that way, from other services that it kind of makes you scratch your head. Because this is not only a Navy thing, it’s not only an East Coast thing, it’s not only a West Coast thing. It’s worldwide. People are seeing this stuff everywhere.”
2/2 IMO, if these UAP are not U.S. aircraft, U.S. no longer has air dominance in their own airspace.
JC: “So you have direct knowledge that unidentified craft, that don’t seem to have the typical, what we’d call, propulsion – what we’d see: rotors, wash, plumes, heat signatures – that these are being encountered by our…we’ll just say, Department of Defense, and we’ll say our…all branches of the military that are in the air, doing this. They’re being encountered. They’re encountering these things that we don’t know whose they are, we don’t know who operates them, we don’t know their intent. I mean, that is…you’re saying that, right?”
Guts: “Yeah, I mean, that’s my opinion. And again, I’m not speaking on behalf of the DoD or the service in any way. But, no…yeah, I mean, if you’re asking me and my opinion? Absolutely.”
JC: “That would seem important to me, that our defense systems…my perspective is that that seems important to me. We should know whose vehicles these are.”
Guts: “Absolutely. Look, at the end of the day, the profession of arms is to defend the country and to defend our allies around the world. And if we’re coming across stuff that we don’t know what it is? We want to know what that is. I’ve heard…there’s been criticism in the media over the years about this threat narrative. Well, I’m sorry but you can’t blame a guy whose job it is, is to access threats and take care of them. I mean, that’s our job.”
Tried something different by adding an audio summary. Need to be more conversational.
JC: “Explain that a little bit more for people that are totally new to this. The idea that there are UFOs, they’re unidentified objects, and what’s the threat narrative?”
Guts: “Well, the threat narrative being that a lot of the language that some people have used when talking about UAP or unidentifieds, is, for example…AATIP. Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program. The word threat is in the title of the program, right? And there are people that had some problems with that or issues. Why are they looking at this as a threat? We don’t know what they are. Well, again, from the perspective of the profession of arms, from the perspective of the defense and the national interests of the United States, unless you know what you’re dealing with, you kind of have to, unfortunately – again, just my opinion here – it’s a default position that you kind of have to take. Because, at the end of the day, we don’t know what we’re dealing with. So, I think that’s why.”
JC: “Yeah, I mean, so you’ve got the one perspective, which is that from a national defense-position, we should know who’s making these objects, who’s flying them, what the intent is. If we don’t know, we better find out. And then, from another perspective, it’s a flight-safety issue. You’ve got these objects and people every day, there have been some near misses. And then there’s the bigger existential questions that come after that, another narrative about the UFO phenomenon. It’s been here for so long, maybe we’re just seeing them more because our technology and our radar systems are integrated, we have better camera systems, better radars, maybe it’s always been here. The idea that there’s an increase in frequency…it appears that way to us, but we don’t know for certain because maybe they’ve always been there and we’re just seeing them more. Who knows?”
[the_ad id=”1724″]
GK: “Can I ask you: Have you become, sort of the unofficial clearinghouse for UFO stories and encounters and tidbits within your circle? I’m asking that in the context of what we talked about before. The Navy’s a small place, you said. So does the word get around, ‘Hey, this guy is interested in this.’ I’m not saying you’re conducting a secret study on behalf of the Navy, but you come across people who have their own stories.”
Guts: “Yeah, absolutely. You know, just in the course of your natural, you know, meeting people and getting to know folks. You know, that’s not the first thing I tell people when I meet them. But, you know, you get to know people and you work in close quarters, and you’re working long hours, long days and long nights, sometimes….you can get to know people. And once I’ve become comfortable with someone and I feel like, ‘Okay, I can.’ Again, stigma, right? If I’m comfortable, if I trust them, that they won’t think I’m a crackpot, I’ll mention, ‘Hey, you know…’ It’s funny, you know, before, there was no real inroad to that conversation, but now, ‘Hey, ever heard of Dave Fravor? Hey, you ever heard of,’ name your incident or name your case.”
JC: “Right. Like a lot has changed over the last five years or so?”
Guts: “Absolutely. Yeah, absolutely.”
JC: “So our Navy people are taking this seriously.”
Guts: “Well…”
JC: “Should I reword the question? Is it your experience that people that you see are taking this serious?”
Guts: “Yeah, yeah. I think they’re…well, they’re certainly taking it more seriously now than they ever have. I’ll tell you that. There’s been a big sea change. And I’ve told, you know, close buddies of mine, you know, that I’ve flown with before, ‘Hey, if you ever see something, don’t be afraid to let me know.’”
GK: “But you don’t go like, ‘Hey, I’m John, nice to meet you. Have you ever seen an alien?’”
Guts: “No, no, no, no, no, no.”
JC: “I mean, that’s not, you know, knowing John, he’s always been really, like, really at times, real skeptical, as he should be. But he always goes for, okay, what’s the core of it? I think one of the big things that we’re going to talk about, but I want to hear about your perspective on what the world has seen, when it comes to the big ones. Let’s talk about, you know, when it comes to the Tic Tac video, when it comes to the Gimbal video. So many people have tried to say, ‘Nothing to see here, move on.’ And they try to dissect it to bits where it’s almost like a syndrome, that they’re not seeing what’s right in front of them. So can you maybe tell us a little bit about those videos that kind of came forward? Did that change the way that you saw stuff? Or was that interesting to you? Or?”
Guts: “I mean, for me, absolutely. You know, it definitely did. Again, those videos are tough, because if you don’t know what you’re looking at, you don’t know what you’re looking at. And it’s hard to dissect what those videos are presenting to you. But, you know, again, just with my background, and my experience as an aviator, when you look at something like Gimbal, for example, or you look at something like Tic Tac or Go Fast, what have you, any number of videos that have been released.”
This is intriguing.
It would take a fighter jet about a mile to pull off this vertical U-turn. The “Gimbal” object does it in only a few hundred feet.
… All without observable propulsion or wings (important at 20,000 ft, where air density is low). 👍 pic.twitter.com/2VT5BzdzdK
Guts: “When you’re looking at that stuff, and you realize, ‘Okay.’ And you hear the audio of the pilots as well, talking about it. You got an object going against the wind, the wind’s 120 knots or whatever the heck it is. You see this thing maintaining flight, presumably with no visible means of propulsion or traditional control surfaces. I mean, that’s huge. Now you get somebody, average Joe citizen who says, ‘Well, you know, it’s not in HD.’ Well, okay, that’s…all right. That’s…”
GK: “Hey, it’s grainy.”
Guts: “Yeah, it’s grainy, you know.”
JC: “Neil Tyson said that, it pissed me off. He doesn’t know what he’s talking about.”
Guts: “To that point, it’s unfortunate that someone who should, at least in my opinion, someone who should know better would say something like that, right? Folks got to remember, you know, the tools and instruments that we’re flying with…number one, they’re not iPhones, okay? They’re not designed to be taking selfies in the air and post them on social media afterwards to get Likes and posts and all that stuff.”
JC: “These are targeting pods, weapons systems.”
Guts: “Listen, these are weapons systems that we have been trained on to defend the American people with. These are weapons systems, they’re not designed to capture UFOs, they’re not designed to capture UAP. We’re not UFO hunters, you know?”
GK: “You’re not there to make a movie or a TV show.”
Guts: “We’re not there to make a movie or a TV show, we’re there to defend the nation. So when people talk about the quote, unquote, ‘quality of the footage,’ or the lack of HD or 1080p, or whatever the hell you want to call it, it’s just a little frustrating because people have to realize and remember that look, these systems that we’re using to capture this stuff were not designed to do that. They were designed to wage war on behalf of the American [people], if I’m being blunt. That’s what they were designed to do. We just happen to be in the right place at the right time or the wrong place at the wrong time. Or however you want to look at it, from which perspective. But people have to understand, that look, these videos, there’s a lot more there that people need to inherently understand and realize, there’s something weird here. It’s not…”
JC: “And look, the exclusion of information drives me crazy, right? So we can’t go against the Tic Tac information because you got Commander David Fravor standing up there and being like, ‘Oh, no, I saw it. That’s it.’ You know, you’ve got Commander Chad Underwood, coming forward, like, ‘Nope, I filmed it. That’s what happened. As soon as it shot off to the left, I had them call and look on radar all around, it was gone.’ He said, ‘It didn’t move out of the field of view of the camera, it was gone.’ And if you listened to the interview, ya know. And so, what’s frustrating, what’s difficult is we have, like, the Gimbal. Now you can hear what the pilots are saying. And people are saying, ‘Oh, let’s just exclude what they’re saying and let’s just look at the video.’ Well hold up a second. Isn’t that evidence? Isn’t witness testimony, to corroborate visual evidence?”
GK: “There’s a whole fleet of them out there.”
JC: “Isn’t that important?”
Guts: “Yeah.”
JC: “So it’s so convenient when people try to dissect things to their desire to be able to minimize something.”
~~~
(On the flip side, the pilot or WSO in the Gimbal encounter said, “It is a f**king drone, bro.” ~Joe)
~~~
JC: “So the translation, really, in my eyes, the missing link is a lot of these active-duty people, that won’t go on record, they won’t go forward, for fear of their career, for fear of reprisal. If we could just get people to talk with us about this, to go on record. That’s something that I think really builds up public understanding of what we’re seeing in these cases. Now, we don’t have that yet, for the Gimbal. I think we will at some day, but we don’t right now. But I think our goal is to take all the information and look at it, and not just what’s convenient to us.”
Guts: “Well, look, I think, especially, you know, over the past few weeks, months…there’s been this weird effort amongst certain outlets to kind of try and just dismiss all this stuff away: ‘Oh, we figured it out, case closed.’ And I know from personal experiences, guys that I know, and other people that I trust…look, there’s gonna be more people coming out, there’s gonna be more folks. There are witnesses out there, and when the time is right for them, I’m sure they’ll come out and say what they have to say, and it will be really hard to stick that toothpaste back in the tube. It’s already out.”
JC: “Meaning…okay, what would stop somebody from coming forward to the public?”
Guts: “Well look, sure…a lot of things. The fact that they’re still in the military, they’re still active duty. Stigma. Like I said, I think we’re turning a corner but it’s still out there. Depending on, hey, I don’t know, maybe you’re in a squadron where the CO tells you, ‘Hey, you know, what, I don’t care what the hell you saw.’ And I’m not saying this is happening, I’m just saying, you know, it just…it’s person to person. So the folks that you’re around and you’re with, if they’re not okay with you talking about it, that’s going to be real hard for that person to wanna come out and say something.”
GK: “So, in this last five years, so much tremendous change. The public is energized, Congress, major media. But, there is considerable pushback. We’ve been saying, publicly, for a while now, ‘The closer you get to the truth, the closer you get to the goods, the harder the pushback is going to be.’”
21 GK: "maybe bodies – the harder the pushback is gonna be. If I were Lockheed and I had this stuff, I wouldn't give it back to us (Lockheed now has that Knapp quote on their vault wall, with the intact craft looming in the background. Thanks, George.😁 ~Joe).
GK: “And it’s not only from within the military and the Pentagon, people don’t want this to be taken seriously, it’s their emissaries in the public sector. Debunkers, who…all right, Tic Tac is a bird, it’s a seagull, it’s a flare, it’s afterburners, it’s a drone, it’s a balloon. You know, all those things. Let’s see what sticks. They’ll throw all that stuff out.”
Could it be seagulls? That's what you said last time. Stick to that rather than changing your answer every time. BTW, where are your peer-reviewed papers on the subject? I keep checking and can't seem to find any. That said, sorry you are not charismatic.
GK: “And we saw the same thing with all the 2019 incidents that we’re going to talk about, the efforts to debunk this stuff. You see those kinds of excuses against the testimony of somebody like Commander Fravor, Commander Underwood, Ryan Graves, people like that. Credible people who are there, who see it, who are experienced. They know what their equipment and their eyes are showing them, are telling them, and yet, these people try to debunk this stuff. You mentioned about media pushback. New York Post has a headline, what is it, ‘2019 cases all explained.’”
[the_ad_placement id=”content”]
JC: “Okay, so let’s get to the brass tax. One of the big things that I wanted the three of us to talk about is what actually happened in 2019, off the West Coast. Why this is important to George and myself, is because we broke that story. We broke that story together. So for everybody that doesn’t know about it, in 2019, in the summer, there was a series of work-ups that were going on off the coast of California. So basically, we had about ten Navy warships that were prepping for departure, and during that work-up, there was a three-night period where there was continuous swarms of unidentifieds, simultaneously around ten Navy warships, that I know of. And it was such a dramatic event, and we were like, ‘Wow, this is incredible!’ And then luckily, George and I were able to get a lot of footage, it was part of a UFO internal report, we were able to put out slides from that report. Images, videos, nine pieces of corroborative, visual evidence. Knapp brought in these three images from the East Coast.”
May 1st 2020 a classified briefing was generated about the UFO / UAP presence via the Office of Naval Intelligence. I was able to obtain information regarding these & other UAP related briefings – as well as – unclassified slides & some intriguing military captured UAP footage. pic.twitter.com/F6V9h64Qfs
— Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell (@JeremyCorbell) April 8, 2021
Those familiar with the briefings articulated to me that the goal was to de-stigmatize the UFO / UAP problem & to promote more intelligence collection regarding UAP incursions & encounters with active military deployments.
JC: “And we dropped them, basically, all on the same few days. And then, on the West Coast, which was 2019, it was a UFO. People on the ships, it was a UFO-event series. Now, we have done a lot of work in the meantime, and I’ve consulted with you (Guts) on a lot…about these, just, you know, personally, that there was a lot of witnesses to this. Now, a lot of witnesses have said, you know, ‘Jeremy, I want you to know what happened. Here we go, we’re gonna go through it all. But, you know, I’m not coming forward, I’m not going to talk about it,’ right? Now, you weren’t involved in the 2019 series of events.”
Guts: “No.”
George Knapp just made me spit out my coffee this morning with this comment. hahahahahaha. I didn't realize you were also a comic genius Mr. Knapp @g_knapp
JC: “But I think it’s really important that, here is now a case that the public can really sink their teeth into. And I maintain that we provided the best we could, what I would consider a dream case. We have thermal imagery, we have IR – infrared, we have radar footage, and we have what I call, deck footage, just normal optics from the deck of a boat. So, it’s not like, just a story anymore. Now we have all these pieces of corroborated, visual evidence that really need to be dissected. What’s happened since we’ve done that, is, obviously, a lot of people go in and they try to dismiss certain things, because that’s what they want to do. And there’s no real voices of the people involved to stand up and say, ‘Well, hold on, you know, that’s not how it went down.’ But I think that’s going to change today. So that’s what we need to talk about now, is how the media has handled that, durationally, a lot of excitement. And then we have these ridiculous stories that get propagated, the one that George just mentioned…New York Post.”
GK: “A fine newspaper.”
JC: “And it’s like, 2019, drones series solved. So before we get into that article or anything, what we need to do is go through each of the pieces of footage and evidence. But I think that I want to hear from you first, before we jump into that. Are you satisfied that we have figured this all out? Or are you here today because you’re not satisfied?”
Guts: “Well, look…and again, just my opinion and nothing more than that. I think there’s more meat on that bone. The case is certainly not closed on that incident. I wasn’t there personally, but you (Knapp) mentioned before, big ocean. little Navy. And you come across folks, and again, just in your natural course of your career, folks that I personally know and work with now. Who, again, you get to know them a little bit more, and you kind of figure out each other’s backgrounds. ‘Hey, where have you been before?’ And someone will mention, ‘Oh yeah, I was on USS’ Name Your Ship. Well, you know, that ship, I know, happens to have been involved in that 2019 series, right? Talk to someone else. ‘Oh, yeah, I was on USS, Whatever.’ And you go, “Oh, interesting. Were you there in 2019?’ And they say, ‘Yeah, I was there in 2019.’ Oh, okay. Again, it’s just this natural conversation that happens, where you finally get to hear firsthand accounts of people that were no-kidding there, saw things with either their own eyeballs, or on the systems that they’re trained to work on, right? The systems that they’re trained to fight with. And you get to hear their side of the story, right? It’s not a piece of footage, it’s not an audio recording, it’s no-kidding, talking to the folks, firsthand.”
GK: “And again, this is…you’re not preparing a classified report for higher ups in the Navy, or contributing to the UAP Task Force,”
Guts: “No, no, no. This is just…”
GK: “You’re talking to friends, colleagues…”
Guts: “I’m talking water-cooler talk, if you wanna call it. Conversations that you have with folks, just in your day to day. And again, we happen to be in the military and we happen to be active duty. But no, it’s not a concerted effort, we’re not compiling a report or anything like that. It’s just like, ‘Oh, you were there? Let’s talk about that.’”
GK: “But again, your impression is, from speaking to them, people who were there, at the incidents we’re gonna talk about is, these are not normal drones. You didn’t buy these at Kmart.”
Guts: “No, again…just my own opinion, and talking with folks that were there…yeah, no, it doesn’t…no, unfortunately, the New York Post, I think, got it wrong (laughs).”
JC: “Okay, well let’s get into it. Bit by bit, let’s get in, so that we all better understand it. So, you wanna start with the Omaha, talk about that?
Guts: “Sure, yeah.”
~~~
JC: “Okay. So, with the USS Omaha, one of the first bits that George and I released, appears to be a sphere that appears to go into the water. And there’s a lot in there, so let’s maybe play that first video, and then we can just say, ‘What are we seeing here?’ Let’s bring everybody up to date, so we can start talking about it.”
According to John Gutierrez, an active duty Navy commander. The round object in the USS Omaha FLIR video recorded on July 15, 2019 was NOT a balloon or a drone going into the ocean.
JC: “Okay, so we can, you know, see it there. And we’ve all seen it 100 times. So, you don’t gotta look at the screen.”
GK: “Thermal-imaging system. This is the dead of night, 100 miles off the West Coast. And this thing is following the USS Omaha.”
JC: “Simultaneously, in this 100-mile radius, which is, you know, far from shore, relatively, you’ve got these objects. This is a spherical-shaped object, this is thermal. So it’s basically a heat-sensing camera. John, in your experience, like, what are we seeing? Like, should we see plumes of heat? What are we seeing and what are we not seeing here?”
Guts: “Yeah, and again, this is kind of one of those videos where, unless you know what you’re looking at, it’s hard to appreciate the significance of what you’re…yeah, you see it, blink in and out there and disappear. On that particular video, what you see is what you get. If the image is representing an oval shape, the heat signature of whatever it was putting out was oval in nature. What are we not seeing on that clip? We’re not seeing wings, we’re not seeing stabilators, we’re not seeing rotors, we’re not seeing exhaust, right? It’s a thermal-sensing system, meaning you’re gonna catch that heat. And trust me, I can’t tell you how many thousands of times I’ve seen something like that on my own, you know, flying in the helo. Yeah, you see it. So it’s very obvious.
~~~
Guts: “The jet exhaust from an F-18, taken off the deck of an aircraft carrier, at night, is very – hell, even during the day – it’s very, very noticeable, it’s very distinguishable. You know, even if you show me a point five (0.5) second clip of that, I can tell you exactly what it is. We’re not seeing that in this video. There’s none of that there.”
GK: “Could it be a balloon? I mean, it followed that ship for an hour and there were fourteen other ones around it.”
Guts: “I don’t see how a balloon could, coincidentally, follow a ship for the duration of time period that the crews said it did. And in winds, okay? It’s not the dead…there’s winds out there, you know, off the coast. And typically, a balloon will will drift in the direction of the wind.”
GK: “Do you know of any drones that look like that, that are round, with no wings, rotor, tail, no known propulsion?”
Guts: “No. Me personally? No. No. No.”
JC: “So usually with FLIR, I’ve seen a lot of drone footage with FLIR, and you see, even if it is a military-grade drone, you see the machine.”
Guts: “Yes, absolutely. If it’s a quadcopter, let’s say, you can see the individual, you know, copters on the four sides of the thing. You can make all that stuff out.”
JC: “The people in charge of the Omaha that I’ve spoken with, at various levels, all the way down, but people who are directly involved with fighting the ship and capturing: ‘We’ve never seen anything like this. It has no means of propulsion that we can see. And, in fact, it went into the water.’ And something that I know, is that there was a sub that was sent after, to look for wreckage, to look for the craft itself. And it wasn’t there, it was gone. They called it, within these…what I’ve been exposed to, a trans-medium vehicle. And we’re seeing those words reflected now in Congress and Senate with the UFO whistle-blower act: Trans-medium. What does that mean? Something that can penetrate from space, to air, to sea, with absolute impunity. No inertial effect. That’s what they believe, that’s what we reported.”
~~~
GK: “The question is: Did it go into the water? It seems to disappear into the water or disappear altogether. And some have suggested, ‘Well, it just was over the horizon.’ What do you know? You have further information, though, I think both of you do.”
JC: “Yes, certainly I do.”
GK: “Did it go into the water?
JC: “It did. And not just it, not just one. Remember, so this is like…over the Ohama itself, let’s say we have fourteen targets. I recently have spoken with people who were in charge of going…at the end of the video, you can hear, the dude says, ‘Launch helo,’ right? They did. They launched a helo. And the pilots, and the crew on that helo, reported seeing these things go above their flight altitude to evade them, and then into the water to evade them. So now I’ve got direct eyewitnesses that saw them go into the water, tracked them down into the water. We always thought they were going into the water. That’s what our government told us was happening in these documents we obtained, right? However, now we’ve got eyewitnesses. Now, are they going to come forward to me? Probably not! But, like, I’m telling you, and I’ve been right about everything else.”
[the_ad id=”1724″]
GK: “So the helo guys, that would be you, that would be you guys.”
Guts: “Sure. Yeah. yeah. No, that’s a pretty typical response if there was something…cause you don’t know what it is. Hell, maybe there’s somebody that needs help in the water, and that’s why you would send a helo out there to conduct some sort of search and recovery effort to try and recover whatever it was. I’d love to talk to those pilots myself.”
JC: “That one, I think, would be very easy to connect you with, right? That’s like, just somebody who..and this is something out of his personal interest. If he wants to talk to them, great. I mean, I don’t need the back-up or for you to say it’s real, but the thing is, for your knowledge, that’s so important. So 100%.”
Guts: “Let’s be honest, I know we’re gonna have to talk about it here more in a second, but…those aren’t the only witnesses.”
JC: “No, we’re about to go deep, bro.
GK: “Before we leave the Omaha, one of the other videos that you made public, Jeremy, is the radar screen, which shows…there’s like fourteen of these things popping in and out around that ship. That kind of circumstance. I mean, I’m sure Navy ships encounter drones and balloons and things, whether they’re closer to shore or out in the ocean, but would that be cause for alarm? I mean, you have these targets of unknown origin all around the ship.”
Guts: “Absolutely. And I hear…look, I follow #UFOTwitter, and I see the banter going back and forth. And, I hear folks, you know, complaining about. ‘Why didn’t you just shoot them down?’ Well hold on a second. People have to understand…again, it’s not like the movies, it’s not like on TV. We’re not just going guns a-blazing everywhere we go, as much as people would like to think that. There is very specific steps that have to happen for any Navy unit to track something and certainly, engage something. When you’ve got something leaving the barrel, I mean, that’s a big deal.”
JC: “And you’re just off the coast of California. People forget that.”
Guts: “We’re just off the coast of California, we’re in our own backyard. We’re not going out there, loaded to bear, every time we go. The majority of our flying is training, we’re out there training. And no, we don’t train with live ordnance. In fact, training with live ordnance happens less often than not. So, yes, it is a big deal that unknowns or unidentifieds are swarming our units. Are there procedures in place to counteract that? Sure, but you gotta remember, we’re not overseas. We’re in our own backyard, conducting training.”
JC: “Which is both more concerning, right?”
Guts: “Yeah. yeah.”
JC: “The thing what you’re saying is you look before you pull the trigger.”
Guts “100%, absolutely.”
JC: “So, I’ll give my two cents on it, which is directly from some of the individuals fighting these ships. Is that there is this triangle of kinetic action, which is opportunity, intent & capability. I asked a lot of the sailors, and a lot of people involved, ‘Who would be pulling the trigger?’ I was like, ‘So, how do you feel about this, now that it’s all done?’ They said, ‘I feel like I failed in my duties.’ I go, ‘Well, what do you mean?’ It like, haunts some of these folks, right? Because, it didn’t seem like an aggressive maneuver, it seemed more like a surveillance and performance. These were the words that were said to me. Remember, and I’ll be specific because I don’t think people know: Around these ten ships, there was usually one high altitude, and we know that it went up to about 21,000 feet, which is important to keep in mind. And then there was this ballet around them, taunting, coming in at an angle. However, there was action taken. There was action taken and I think we’ll talk about this. Which is that…on two of the ships in particular, there was anti-drone technology that was attempted to be used. And different types. On one of the ships…it was three different types that they…three different ways. All of which were ineffective. And they went out and did a test after, right? Some of the guys went out and did a test after, to see, ‘Hey, does this stuff work?’”
Guts: “To test the equipment.”
JC: “It worked like a charm! They would be able to hit things down, return to sender, no problem.”
GK: “But it didn’t work in this instance.”
JC: “It did not work in this instance. And I know of, personally, three ships that…what was three, that tried to – was it two or three – that tried to do this actual defense maneuver. Which, you know, obviously it’s like, no big deal. If something’s there, you can get it down. But also, there was attempts to just find out, where are they coming from. So we’ll get more into that, but let’s show the radar footage. I wanna get your opinion on this.”
JC: “So we’ve all seen this. And I just wanna see…in the middle of the image, that’s the ship, right?”
Guts: “Yep.”
JC: “OK. And so, you see these things popping in and out.”
Guts: The reason this is important is because, again, it’s all about corroborative data, okay? It’s not just the witnesses, it’s not just the thermal footage of an object going in the water. You’ve got a screen capture of real objects around the ship.”
JC: And there’s up to, I think, fourteen. And the thing is, they’re kind of going in and out of radar. Because in this radar system, if they go below that scan volume, they can kind of disappear for a second. So they were wondering, what’s going on. Turns out, a lot of these were apparently going into the water and having this trans-medium vehicle. Okay, great. So then you’ve got these illuminated objects, about ten to fourteen feet in diameter, that have no control surfaces…that are flying with impunity, and going in and out of the water, going up to like 21,000 feet, at least, that we know of. This is starting to build an interesting case. We’ve got radar now, we’ve got thermal, and a bunch eyewitnesses that people haven’t heard from…YET.”
GK: As somebody who is completely ignorant of this technology, I’d be wondering: What are they doing? What is the purpose of that? Is it surveillance, intelligence gathering? What would be your guess?
Guts: Well that’s the million-dollar question, right? Is…who’s operating them? Number one. What’s their intent? Because it’s ambiguous, right? They didn’t crash into the ship, thank God. They weren’t running into people or anything like that. But, they were certainly, like you said and like we’ve heard from folks that we’ve talked to, there was definitely this sense of…maybe some sort of surveillance and performance aspect of it.”
JC: “Yeah, look what I can do.”
Guts: “Look what I can do. And we’ll talk about it a little bit later on. But these objects performed maneuvers that are just….I mean, come on. They’re not drones, okay? They’re not conventional drones.”
JC: “And we’re gonna get into some of what witnesses have said, but I wanna go to the third piece that I think is important. It’s not as visually stunning, it’s the least visually stunning. But the next video is called deck footage.”
JC: “And…why this is important to me. So you got like a thermal thing, and you’re like, ‘Okay, that’s probably just…you can discard it and say that’s probably just a balloon.’”
2 "The stills provided prove nothing of the sort. It looks like a balloon or other object hitting the water as seen through a thermal imaging system. Once again, maybe other data exists that is compelling and truly exotic, but this certainly isn't that."
Murgia Tweet: “With video released, does Tyler (Rogoway) still think it’s a balloon?”
Rogoway Tweet: “YES!”
~~~
JC: “Then you get radar and you realize, ‘Okay, now this is something more substantial.” Then you get this footage, and I thought it was so important, I released it last because it was the least visually stunning. But why this footage, to me, is important, is because now, you can’t say that that’s just, you know, some hot or cold balloon. Like, okay, well it’s self luminous. So now these things got lights. So all of a sudden, they’re machines, right? This is like…so I found this to be important that they’re self luminous. And this is just some dude on the deck filming: ‘Hey, they’re surrounding our ship, what’s going on?’ But I think that that was lost on a lot of people. Again, it establishes, in my mind, corroborative, visual evidence with each new source of evidence. You get another perspective on, you know, I gotta take this a little more seriously. So that video itself is not super impressive, but do you agree that it’s good to have another layer, right?”
Guts: “I would never discount any of those pieces. It all…they’re all pieces of the puzzle, okay? They’re all pieces of the puzzle and right now, we don’t know if we even have all the pieces to build the puzzle.”
JC: “I’m pretty sure there’s some being held back, to be honest with you.”
Guts: “I think so, too. And so, anything that we can get to try and paint an accurate picture of what happened, I think is important.”
GK: “We put these images out together, Jeremy first on his website, ExtraordinaryBeliefs.com and me on KLAS TV. And, of course, you know, you have a range of responses from the UFO world, including from people who don’t want this to be true. Either they don’t like us, they wanna slap us down. So they go to the Pentagon and say, “Is this real?” And we made a point that all that footage was in the hands of the UAP Task Force and the Pentagon. And to our absolute astonishment, the Pentagon comes back and says, “Yes, it’s real. It was recorded by the Navy.” It gives us a little bit more credibility and shot down a lot of people who wanted to shoot us down.”
"I can confirm that the referenced photos and videos were taken by Navy personnel. The #UAPTF has included these incidents in their ongoing examinations" – Susan Gough. Pentagon #UAP#JeremyCorbellpic.twitter.com/DPuw4I11Oj
JC: “And also, I mean, let’s, again, because this is like a brand new conversation we’re having about it. Let’s be clear, for everybody who doesn’t know. Which is that…and I’ve said it before, and we’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: So, we had knowledge of certain assets that were in a UFO briefing that was being passed around within our military and our government, to train people in order how to identify true UFOs & then how to report them. Now this was a classified briefing that was going around within the military, that as journalists, we got wind of. But inside, inherently unclassified, was some – not everything we put out – but some. So, we were able to get that information out to the public. It was never gonna be seen, publicly, but we got it out. But on top of that, we somehow got a bunch of footage that our Pentagon didn’t have. Our UAPTF, the Task Force…they didn’t have it. So we were like, kind of astonished. ‘Well, we should make sure they have it, cause we’re about to release it.’ So, luckily we know people, that was the right way to do it, and we said, ‘Hey, this is coming out, we wanna make sure you got it.’ So we tried to do everything in the right way. Maybe that’s what they so quickly validated that this is real military footage, filmed of unidentifieds, included in the investigation into UFOs. Maybe that’s why, because we did it right, and got it to them. So that’s how it went down, for the audience that doesn’t know about this.
“But there’s more to it. It wasn’t just one ship, the USS Omaha, there was also the USS Russell that we released, not only video, but also a slide that was contained in that briefing. And this one gets everybody hot and bothered because, first of all, it’s green, right?”
~~~ JC: “[But first], let’s do the slide of the Omaha, This is an actual briefing slide that is unclassified, however it was contained within a classified briefing.”
~~~
~~~
JC: “As journalists, George and I were able to obtain this image. This is a UAS: Unmanned Aerial System, some people say.”
Guts: “Sure. Yep.”
JC: “Spherical in shape, right? They say it right there. Spherical in shape.”
GK: “They searched the water for wreckage, the search was ineffective.”
JC: “One of the people that actually designated, like…what these were, [said]: The only we had that we could classify it as, was unmanned, because it wasn’t, let’s say, big enough as a normal craft, to hold a human. So, it was a UFO. It was unidentified, still is unidentified, but we call it an Unmanned Aerial System. And look, this straight out of a briefing (looking at the slide). And what’s so important to me was that it’s not just like we’re making this up, you know? Other things went in front of our eyes when we were investigating all this stuff. We were exposed to other information, is what I’m trying to say.”
~~~
JC: “Let’s move on to the to the last bit of the USS Russell. USS Russell was another ship that was out during this workup. And USS Russell, it had a slightly different experience than the other ships. Same kind of thing, swarms. But when George and I saw the videos, and we saw what was reported, we’ll talk about the slide and what was reported. But let’s watch the video.”
JC: “They look triangular by angle of observation. However, we were told that it was in things that passed in front of our eyes, that they were pyramid in shape. And so we reported that and we put it out.”
GK: “Pretty famous now, this is all over the place.”
Guts: “I’m familiar with with this clip. And, you know, look, at the end of the day, whether it’s a pyramid, or a triangle, or whatever the hell it is, I think what’s lost on people, again, is the fact that that there was a there there to begin with. There was something there.”
JC: “Let’s describe it. So what you’re referencing is that there’s this big argument about the shape of it, right?”
Guts: “Sure.”
JC: “That’s what people are saying. It’s a lens effect. And actually, they went all the way up to Congress. At first, it was the little NVG, Night Vision. It was a PVS-14, is the standard issue since 2001, to our armed services. So the guy’s got this, and he’s filming through it with a camera. So first, they said this one had a triangle aperture, right? And that’s what’s causing this effect, this distortion, right? And then, I was like, looking at it because I got one. And I’m like, ‘Nah, man. Nah.’ They’d have to like, consciously put tape on it. So then, they kind of backtracked, moved the goalposts. Now it’s the camera that’s doing this. We started asking people involved, and the funniest thing someone said to us was, ‘Look, if it was pyramid in shape, it would still look like a pyramid, even if there was an aperture issue.’ Which I thought was hilarious, right? That’s true. But I’m not staking my claim…”
GK: “We don’t have a dog in this fight. We don’t care if it looks like a pyramid. Is it an unknown craft? That’s what we wanted to know. And yeah, it is.”
JC: “Yeah!”
Guts: “What matters is there was something there that wasn’t supposed to be, that we don’t know what it was.”
[the_ad_placement id=”content”]
JC: “Seven hundred feet, as you’ve said to me a bunch, over the last few years.”
GK: “There’s a rangefinder, it was seven hundred feet above the deck.”
JC: “And there were three of them. And so, we don’t have all the videos from that, you know, but there were three of them, close proximity to one another, seven hundred feet off of the tail of it, right? And it would follow the ship, and at one point, the ship stopped, and the object stopped.”
So that would lead to the next question. Are our Navy personnel so inadequate, the SNOOPIE teams, radar operators, pilots and trained seaman don't recognize an aircraft 700 feet above their ship?
GK: “Am I correct in saying that both of you have spoken with crew members who were there?”
JC: “Oh, yeah. People…”
Guts: “Yes.”
GK: “So I don’t know…where we. You have, John?”
Guts: “Yeah. Yeah, I’m aware of people that were on those ships at that time.”
JC: “And I can say I’ve filmed and recorded with people that were not only there at that time, but had the responsibilities and duties that would directly give me information about how these things were dealt with. And I think, really importantly…so let’s just get to the the basic understanding: I don’t care if these things are shaped like Mickey Mouse. They’re craft of unknown origin, flying with impunity, moving along, intelligently controlled. We don’t know whose they are, we don’t know where they came from, where they launched, where they landed. And we took action against them from the USS Russell, in three different ways: anti-drone technology. And all of which were ineffective. Now, when you talk about witnesses, and we’ve both talked with people involved. And again, I have filmed and recording with, you know, they don’t want it out, they’re active duty, but they gave me a good, by letting me record with them. But I’ll tell you this… Do you (Guts) want to talk about this? We both…one of the witnesses told us, as they were watching it. What did these things off the USS Russell…what did they do?”
~~~
99 JG: "And when you ask him: Did you hear anything? Did you see anything, in terms of like, again, like exhaust, or something like that."
Guts: “One eyewitness account in particular that was…it was pretty extraordinary. First thing they noticed was these lights, kind of up in the sky. What distinguished these lights from any others is kind of the follow-on maneuvers that it executed.”
JC: “On the USS Russell.”
Guts: “On the USS Russell.”
JC: “And this is a sailor that we that we both know.”
Guts: “Yes. Yeah.”
JC: “And that was there, and saw it.
Guts: “Yeah, they were up topside, you know, outside of the ship, as opposed to some of the other folks who we’ve talked to who are kind of fighting from the inside of the ship, who can’t corroborate what they see on their screens, visually, with their eyeballs, right?”
JC: “The SPY-1 itself, by the way, has some unique properties. But that SPY-1, they’re inside the ship, so they’re kind of getting that internal data of how they’re moving, the distances, all that stuff, where they’re coming from, but then there’s people topside.”
Guts: “But then there’s people topside, right? And so this one individual in particular that we’re talking about, what they saw was, again, these lights up in the sky, and all of a sudden, they just dropped down to the horizon level, you know, almost instantaneously, right? Drops down on the horizon, and all of a sudden it starts approaching the ship from the stern, from the rear of the ship. Once these lights come forward, first it goes up the port side of the ship. And it’s funny, to hear them talk about it, it’s almost like they…as this object or light, or whatever it was, was kind of flying around the ship, the sailors on the deck are following it, right? So first they’re on the aft end of the ship, and the object moves forward, so they move forward, right? So now they’re on the port-forward side of the ship. And it’s just floating there, a couple hundred feet in the air. Then it moves to the starboard side, right across, and they scurry across the ship. And they’re kind of, you know, going through wherever they need to go to get to the other side. And they maintain eyes on it, because they’re just shocked at what they’re seeing. And then, probably the most dramatic part of the of the event was…once it moved to the starboard side of the ship, it just shot straight up into the air. And the word that the sailor that we spoke with used was, ‘It just zoomed, it zoomed, it zoomed straight up in the air. And when you ask them, ‘Did you hear anything? Did you see anything, in terms of like, again. exhaust?’”
JC: “Or a sonic boom.”
Guts: “Right. Did you hear it? Right, exactly. And of course, the answer is, ‘No’”
GK: “So, this sounds like a drone I could buy at Walmart then, or something (JC and Guts laugh). Obviously it is not.”
Guts: “Yeah. Yeah. No, obviously it’s not. And again, if we’re gonna take that sailor’s account at face value, which I do, and again, I know the individual and I trust that what they’re…they’re telling it like it is. They’re telling what they saw, right? It’s dramatic. And no, it’s not a drone from Walmart that you can get, or anywhere else for that matter. That I know of.”
JC: “Yeah. And this is one of many eyewitness. It’s a little frustrating. I’m saying that what’s missing is these people coming forward and saying, ‘Look, I was part of that, and this is what I encountered.’ It’s just hard to get people to come and do that because of the nature of working in the military. But these accounts…”
GK: “This whole issue about drones has been used to discredit and debunk many of these incidents and to strip it of its aura of mystery. Can you, without giving away or crossing a line, can you just talk about drones and whether you see them? You’ve served both domestically in the Navy and around the globe? Do people send up drones and take pictures of Navy ships? Do you see adversary drones that are intelligence-gathering operations?”
Guts: “This is what I’m comfortable saying. What I’ll say is this: The short answer? Yeah. Yeah. We’re out there and we’re as on the front lines as you can get, around the world. And so, do we encounter drones? Yeah, we absolutely do. And it’s only gotten, you know, as drones have proliferated around the world, they’ve become cheaper and easier to get a hold of and operate. Yeah, it’s something that we encounter, you know, pretty regularly. You know, me personally, on deployments around the world, yeah, we’ve come across it. So it’s definitely something that we have to take into account whenever we’re going over the horizon and working around the world.”
GK: “Well, we’ve read public accounts, media accounts that show that our adversaries are developing drones. We’re seeing, you know, you can’t talk about this, but in the Ukraine, drones have taken a very pivotal role in that conflict that’s going on. So, China, Russia, we’re sure they’re developing some advanced drones. I mean, do you see – I don’t know if you can talk about this – drones of a more sophisticated level that, you know is being flown by some potential adversary?”
Guts: “Unfortunately, I’m gonna have to politely decline to comment on that. But like I said, you know, in short, they’re something that we have to take into account, that we didn’t really have to take into account, you know, ten, twelve years ago, like we do now. It’s something that we have to consider when we’re going abroad and you know, operating (internationally?).”
GK: “On the drone question. So, it also depends on where you are. So Jeremy, you’ve got some great information and testimony based on where these…you don’t encounter Kmart drones a hundred miles out to sea.”
JC: “Yeah, so what we’re gonna do now is kind of bring a new body of evidence and information to people because, for me, it’s like, you know, I’m getting all this information, and it’s starting to really make me understand what’s happening. The argument has never been, by the way, drone. Drone is just a designation of something that doesn’t have an immediate, physical, biological pilot in it. And it’s usually determined by the size of the craft, and by the maneuverability. But again, remember, that drone that we’re looking at is spherical, with no flight control system, so I’m already a little skeptical that this is a Walmart thing.”
~~~
JC: “So what I think now is, with the Paul Hamilton, let’s talk about that ship. It hasn’t gotten a lot of attention. And this was one of the ten ships that was part of this 2019 swarm. And very uniquely, the Paul Hamilton was in closest proximity to a ship called the Bass Strait, which is a cargo ship that’s run by Pacific Basin.”
Was there an investigation that determined Bass Strait WAS NOT the origin of the 2019 UAP swarms off California? 😉
I wonder if @PacificBasin will comment about how Wikipedia says the units were launched from Bass Strait?
— Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell (@JeremyCorbell) June 19, 2022
~~~
JC: “And I wanna start with an image that comes up that the media has said, which is that the case has been solved. So Zack, can we bring up the first image from The New York Post? Their horrible, disingenuous, ridiculous, parroted reporting of untruth, because you’re about to see it.”
~~~
JC: “So if people can see that: Mysterious drone attacks on US warships solved. I don’t agree with that assessment, (Knapp laughs) and let’s get to specifically why. But to tell you what that’s saying. So there was a cargo ship that was right by the Paul Hamilton. And it has been propagated, this mythology, that the these hundred-plus drones, within a hundred-mile radius, were launched from, and landed back to this ship called the Bass Strait. In fact, it’s propagated so much you can even find it on Wikipedia now. It’s already, you know, it’s just…okay, Wikipedia. There we go. Just go ahead and read it, George.”
GK: “‘Pacific Basin is the owner and operator of Bass Strait, a cargo ship that launched a series of drones that surveilled and harassed United States Navy ships, including the USS Paul Hamilton, in the waters off of Southern California in 2019.’ No equivocation. It is the ship that launched these drones.”
JC: “Yeah, so let’s get that garbage off the screen because it’s false, okay? So but here’s the deal, man. The reason why you find it trickled down to Wikipedia is because this has been a false narrative that has been propagated by, you know, subpar journalists and subpar journalism sources, and they try to trickle it down all the way. Now, somebody just reads that, they’re like, ‘Oh, great. Case solved.’ So let’s back the fuck up. Okay, Paul Hamilton. So, I think what we should do, is we should…we have two witnesses that were willing to put their voice out there and you can affirm that they are actually…”
Guts: “Yeah. No, these are guys that I know personally. One of them I work with every day.”
JC: “Oh, wow! Okay, there we go.”
Guts: “Guys that I’m very familiar with.”
JC: “Okay. So…yeah, it’s funny, man, people are happy to share on the level that they can about these experiences. So I’m going to play, I think an audio clip would be good for…”
GK: “We’re not using the names, though, right?”
Guts: “No, no,”
JC: “No way. So this is Paul Hamilton, ten ships, 2019 swarm. Individuals that were there. Two of them. Wanna get their perspective on a few things. So first was, you know, asking: Is this a test? Was this just some U.S. government tasks during workups, right? And we’ll just listen to it and talk about it after?”
~Audio Begins~
JC: “What did you think was going on during this encounter series? Did you think this was a test?”
Eyewitness #1 (E1): “So like, we didn’t really think anything of it, other than that it was like the people testing us. Like, purposefully sent out drones to go harass us. So, it’s like the most high-end technology, followed us. And then after the first night, that was pretty apparent that it wasn’t. But like, at the same time, it’s like, ‘Hey, you need to track this more closely. You need to follow them and see where they go afterwards.’”
JC: “Isn’t it typical, though, if that were the scenario, and you were being tested, at some point afterwards, you would be made aware that you were being tested? And whether or not you passed or didn’t pass the test?”
E1: “Yeah.”
JC: “And that never happened?”
E1: “No (laughs), no, because like, it wasn’t a test. Unless there’s like a secret at like the highest level and no one’s told anyone, that wasn’t a test during SWATT. But like, the mindset at the time was test during SWATT, but also looking back, with like, kind of a clear eye, it’s like, that makes no sense to have a test that lasts that long, at night, after a really busy day, when we’re shooting like, live ordnance during the day. It would just get into the safety of like, what we were doing, and it wouldn’t make any sense for them to do that.”
~Audio Ends~
JC: “So, can you explain to us, like, you know, so this is somebody that’s saying…he’s saying it wasn’t a test device, it wasn’t our tech. So explain that.”
JG: “So, you know, what you hear that individual talking about in the beginning is, you know, at first, that’s kind of the assumption everybody makes, right? Yeah, okay, we’re being tested, you know? They’re sending out drones, the tests are different tactics and procedures to respond to this thing. But then it starts happening night after night. It’s happening at hours that are really, really outside of the hours of testing, if you want to call it that, right? Because you got to remember, these ships are participating in other training events throughout the entire day, okay? And shooting live ordnance, you heard him talk about that. And like I told you before, whenever we shoot live ordnance, that’s a big deal, okay? Certainly, in real-world actions, but also in training, you know? We don’t do that lightly and there’s a lot that goes into that. So, the idea that we would be executing a high-stress, high-level event during the day, and then to be tested with drone swarms in the middle of the night… Because you gotta remember, you got to put yourself in the mindset, in the shoes of these guys back in 2019. This is happening, you know, about 2200 to like, 0300 at night, you know? 10 o’clock at night till about two or three in the morning sometimes, right? And, I mean, is it totally out of the question that we would be tested at that time? No, but when you consider and you heard him…I’m glad you heard him say it: Safety, right? No matter what we’re doing, we’re always gonna operate with a certain level or amount of safety precautions imbued into the training event, so that we don’t do something stupid, or God forbid, get somebody hurt, you know? So you heard him talk about that.
“You heard him talk about how, okay, night one, okay, it’s probably a test. But then, something that you heard him say was that folks higher up in the chain of command started asking, ‘Hey, start gathering all the data that you can about this and feed it up.’ Okay? And who knows, maybe it was a test of our information-gathering capabilities. But that is not something that would be typically done, right? There’s much more important aspects of our tasks and procedures that need to be tested, not how information flows up and down the chain of command. That’s easy. You can easily put a report together and send it up to whoever it needs to get to.”
JC: “Without a hundred objects, with no point of departure or landing.”
Guts: “Exactly. So, night one? Sure, maybe. Night two, three, four, or whatever it is? They realize, okay, this is real and there’s something else going on here. And oh, by the way, again, folks higher in the chain of command are asking for us to stay on this case, you know?”
JC: “So, to go to your point there, is that, okay, first we ell this was our technology and it was just a test. It started becoming very apparent to everybody on the ships, you know, whoa, this is real, like, we gotta deal with this. This is not just some, you know, even like a black projects test, which, by the way, is not something you do, like, you know, in that training area, around… But I’ve talked to people that have encountered black projects, and there is a process.”
Guts: “Oh, there’s a whole process. Absolutely. I haven’t had this happen to me, personally, but I know of guys, personally, who have seen stuff they shouldn’t have seen
JC: “Commander Underwood did and he told me the process.”
Guts: “There ya go. He has, you know, you come across something that you see, that you’re not supposed to see, well, you’re gonna get a call. Especially as an aviator, you know, as soon as you land on deck and you start doing all the necessary paperwork required for any flight, anyway, you’re also gonna get a call from the appropriate intelligence folks and be like, ‘Hey, sorry, I need you to come by the intel shop and you gotta fill out…’ It’s a huge hassle, right? (laughs) And I can imagine that for someone, you know, a civilian, let’s say, ‘Man, I’d love to see something like that!’ No, not really (laughs). It’s kind of a pain in the ass.”
GK: “And at the end of that process, do they say, ‘You didn’t see that’?”
Guts: “At the end of that process, you know, you sign…you agree to whatever paperwork they tell you, that, ‘Hey, you can’t talk about this.’ That didn’t happen with anybody in 2019. Certainly no one that we’ve talked to, and not that I’ve heard of through other channels, either.”
JC: “And also, the head of the Navy was asked about this and made a statement. And they (media) were like: ‘Have you figured this out? Whose are they?’”
Navy's top officer says mysterious ‘drones’ that swarmed destroyers remain unidentified:https://t.co/R0vwjfRPNw
JC: “It is undetermined. Everybody we know, involved in this [has said], ‘We don’t know whose these were.’ But let’s just start with eliminating…these were not ours. That’s the consensus of everybody. That’s, to the best of our understanding, that’s…despite their capabilities, they weren’t ours.”
Guts: “Well, it wasn’t a test, as I think is…it certainly wasn’t a test, you know?”
JC: “So, I wanna play another clip now and this one is really important. We kind of put this forward in one of our first episodes, you know, that these things were coming from the west. And it took me a while to understand it, and you really…this is why I like, go to Guts, ‘Hey, man, does this mean anything?’ He’s like, ‘It means a lot.’ Okay, so let’s hear what he had to say, and then I want to hear John’s reaction.”
~Audio Begins~
JC: “So from what direction was this swarm coming?”
Eyewitness 1 (E1): “It was actually coming in the west.”
JC:” It was coming from the west.”
E1: “Yeah, from the west.”
JC: “So over water.”
E1: “Over water, away from land. I mean, like, the only thing we have over there is like, Hawaii, which probably was closest thing west of us.”
JC: “And when they were departing, what direction were they departing to?”
E1: “They would depart in different, on different bearings than they came in on.”
JC: “So normally, always from the west and then departing in a different direction?”
E1: “Yeah, yeah. Not exclusively, but yeah, pretty constantly, it’d be a different bearing. Which is weird, right? Like, so if you deploy a drone to go check something out, it would come back. So that was like, something significant enough for us to like, report the drone’s going in a different direction than they came.”
~Audio Ends~
JC: “Okay. What is he saying and why is it important?”
Guts: “So again, you know, the whole fact that these things were coming from the west. When you hear him say, you know, I think the closest thing to the west is Hawaii, right (laughs)? And, you know, Hawaii is, you know, I don’t know how many thousands of nautical miles from the coast of San Diego. There’s nothing out there, there’s just open water to the west, okay? And like they mentioned, if it were a drone, or a typical drone being operated by a typical drone operator, typically, if you’re gonna go check something out…if I’m sitting here with a drone and I got the joystick in my hand, and I’ve got the drone on my lap here, and I’m gonna launch it across the street, I’m gonna go straight there and come straight back, right? It takes battery power to, you know, whenever you have long durations of time of flight. Just the controlling aspect of the drone, you want to maintain eyes on and all the time. I guess you could make the argument that, ‘Well, you know, if you’re really trying to surveil, you kind of don’t want to come in on the same bearing that you’re coming out on.’ But regardless, these things were always coming from the west and then departing into into another direction and there’s nothing out to the west, but ocean.”
JC: “Yeah. So even if we’re talking off of another ship, let’s be really clear. So what’s happening is, in this 100-mile radius, swarms simultaneously on ten ships. And we’re giving one example of Paul Hamilton where these objects are appearing from the west, where there is no landmass, there’s no ship that’s going to be launching them from the west, and then they’re departing after long periods of durational use, they’re departing in another direction. So this causes a problem of where’s the launch, where’s the land?”
Guts: “Yeah.”
~~~
On July 27th, 2021, during the 4Bidden Disclosure Conference, Lue Elizondo had this to say about drones.
Lue: “Let’s look at the best drone technology we have, and I’m gonna be very careful what I say here, make sure I don’t upset anybody back in DC. But let’s say – here’s our little pen again – this is a drone. There’s two types of drones, for the most part, and there’s other ones as well. There’s hybrids and [inaudible] and whatnot. But you have those that can take off vertically, kind of like a quadcopter, and they can hover and they can loiter around for a little while. And then you’ve got those that are fixed wing and they can fly long range but they have to fly fast enough to create lift and to continue to move. So think a Predator or something like that. The ones that move fast and fixed wing could fly really far, but they have a very hard time loitering. They have to fly racetracks, they can’t just stop and hover and loiter for twenty, thirty minutes. And just like the quadcopters that can hover, they have a hard time loiter ability because you need fuel and fuel is weight, and weight to a rotary wing vertical lift is the devil. So you want to be as light as possible and that’s why a lot of these little quadcopters are so light.
“So if you wanted to launch something over a Navy ship that can hover over the flight deck as has been reported through the Omaha and the Kidd incidents, then you’re talking about a drone capability that is probably not a fixed-wing, long-range capability. It means it has to be launched from somewhere near by. Even two, three miles, as far as you can with some of the more, if you will, commercially available, control systems. Even the best military systems you have some much longer capability, but you still have to launch them and you have to recover them, you don’t just let them crash into the ocean because then they can be found, right? So they have to be launched from somewhere and they have to be controlled from somewhere by someone. And there’s an infrastructure, a huge footprint, that is required to do that. You need a trained operator to do it, with enough juice where you can send out a signal to your quadcopter, your quadcopter can react and then enough, if you will, payload on this, so it can send the signal back to the operator. The operator knows where the drone is, it’s looking at pictures and all that stuff, and then be able to fly the drone all the way back.
“So there’s more practical challenges with trying to create something like that. If you’re talking about a fixed-wing drone, that’s a little easier but it’s got to keep moving, it’s got to be moving fairly fast, and it’s not just going to stop and hover. So, therein lies the problem. If you want a loiter, you’ve got to launch it from relatively nearby. Now, the Navy has sea-domain awareness. They are the best at knowing anything that’s in the ocean. These guys know. That’s how we catch these drug runners coming in on these little tiny submersibles that you can barely see. There’s a reason we catch them. So we know, if there’s, let’s say, a Chinese frigate nearby that’s launching drones, we know that. A lot of these ships have transponders on them, AIS. We know, unless they’re squawking black, meaning they’re not transmitting, then we have other ways to find out who’s in our area and we have very high-fidelity radar systems and we have electro-optical systems. So, it’s unlikely. I’m not saying it’s impossible because the Chinese have harassed us before and vice versa with unmanned, aerial vehicles and aerial systems and by the way, that technology is improving, exponentially, almost every year, so at some point these things may have that capability that we’re seeing, but right now, they don’t, and that’s the problem. The foreign, adversarial technology isn’t where it needs to be for us to see the things that we’re seeing, it’s not there yet. It might be there in ten, fifteen, twenty years, but it’s not there now. And that’s why this is a problem, that’s why we need to have this conversation because if it’s not U.S. technology, and it’s not foreign, adversarial technology then whose technology is it, right? I mean we have to have that conversation. You can’t have an intellectual, a truly, objective conversation about this topic, and not introduce that as potentially, potentially part of the calculus.
~~~
And a few months before that, on May 20th, 2021, Elizondo had this conversation with researcher, Richard Dolan, about the possibility of drones over Navy ships.
Lue: “When you really look at it, you look at what is required to have something that can hover over the flight of a boat for hours at a time, and not a single one of these have been shot down, not a single one of these have ever been recovered from the ocean, not a single one of them has had a mechanical issue, not a single one has been able to be intercepted.”
Dolan: “It seems insane.”
Lue: “And by the way, we have helicopters on these ships and not a single one has been caught by one of our helicopters or aircraft. You know, okaaaay. But you really got to do a lot of mental gymnastics then, to prove to me that that is some sort of drone technology. I’m not saying it’s impossible. What I’m simply saying is you’ve got to build a case then to prove that. Because at this point, that’s a greater feat than saying it’s a UAP. Really. Because at that point, it’s, ‘Okay, well, we’re really talking about something then that, if a foreign adversary has, is really incredible.’”
~ ~ ~
Back to Knapp, Corbell and Guts…
George Knapp (GK): “The other part would be tracking them. So let me play dumb devil’s advocate. Let’s say you’ve developed a super-duper, double-secret probation drone that can fly hundreds of miles, and you launch it from, say, San Diego, or Catalina and it’s gonna buzz these ships. You should be able to track those things. Those ships should be able to track them.”
Guts: “Yeah.”
GK: “Coming there and going back.”
Guts: “That’s a great point. So even on the systems that they were tracking them on, they always came from the west. So it’s not like at launched from San Diego, did a big circle around, and then came from the west. No. It was always coming from the west, originally. Does that make sense?”
GK: “Yeah, but there’s no drone that you know of…”
Guts: “Not that I know of? No, no.”
GK: “That could have that kind of range or fly from Hawaii from the west.”
Guts: “No, no.”
[the_ad id=”1724″]
Jeremy Corbell (JC): “And the other thing is, we’re hearing from somebody very isolated, who was there from the Paul Hamilton. But those that I’ve spoken with, who were in a position to know this on the Omaha, said, ‘I’m gonna regret saying this to you, Jeremy. But they just seemed to appear. That’s when we started talking about the fact that were going into the water.’ So, the the idea is, if they’re going off radar, off scan volume, and even optically, as I told you, the helo pilots are seeing [them] go into the water. They’re likely coming out of the water, too. So that’s what’s really interesting. This possibility that they’re trans-medium, emerging from the water and descending into the water.”
GK: “Could there be a submarine out there that’s launching drones, somewhere in the water? And if so, would we able to detect a sub and detect where those drones are coming from?”
Guts: “Right, umm…”
GK: “Right, you can’t…”
Guts: “I think I’m gonna, yeah…I think I won’t be able to…yeah.”
JC: “But even if you, I mean, I can tell you from public, you know, stuff…that is not a technology that is currently readily available by any nation to be in our waters that I’m aware of, public knowledge, or anybody else that I know, that would know. So this idea that…look, if there was a foreign nation’s submarine within that radius of those hundred mile ships, that were launched, wouldn’t that kind of be big news, don’t ya think?”
Guts: “Yeah, that’d be a big deal.”
JC: “Yeah, I think that’d be a big deal. So it’s kind of a ridiculous idea that people…they’ll just throw it out there, like, ‘They were probably launched as swarms by subs.’”
GK: “We know that that has been thrown out there, that even newspapers have done it. The New York Times. So, in advance of the anticipated Halloween release of this UAP report to Congress, the New York Times does a hit piece. Call it a pre-bunking, where they have these general, generic explanations. Oh yeah, same thing is that New York Post story, we’ve explained this all, it’s no big deal, it’s gonna be drones. And, of course, we don’t know of any drones that fit the bill for this.”
JC: “And so, I’m unsatisfied, so far, as we’re going through this exercise together. I’m unsatisfied, so far, that we have figured this out. I’m unsatisfied [that] it’s some sort of other nation’s sub. That would be huge news, man, you know, off the coast of California, you know, within that hundred-mile radius, about fifty miles, that circle begins. So let’s kind of keep going down and see if we can figure this out. But the people that are there, it means something when we can hear from them directly. I’m really grateful I can play these. So, I also want, for these witnesses. I think that it’s important that, you know, the question is asked: Can you talk about this? Can you talk to me about this? Because I think it’s important that people understand, they were never asked to not talk about it. So I just want to play this clip.”
~Audio Begins~
JC: “Did anybody ever tell you, before, during or after that: That’s classified, you can’t talk about it?”
E1: “Nobody explicitly or implicitly said, ‘Never talk about this incident right here.’”
JC: “Nobody ever had you sign a Page 13, or an NDA, saying this is our own black tech, and we tested it on ourselves, don’t talk about this?”
E1: “The opposite. No one said anything about it.”
JC: “No one ever brought up the possibility, ‘Hey, that’s an adversarial drone’?”
E1: “But like, it’s pretty common, like, if something crazy happened, and we think that an adversary has an upper hand, then I could see them saying that.”
JC: “But the point is, that’s not what happened.”
~Audio Ends~
JC: “So I think it’s important that we recognize that I’m just talking to an individual in a way that is very…it’s okay to do that. They were never asked not to talk about it. Is that correct?”
Guts: “Yeah, well, I’m sure, you know, look, people are going to have questions: How are they talking about this without, you know, without catching flack? Because you can talk about it. There’s nothing that they…there’s nothing classified about talking about something that you saw, you know? In this context.”
GK: “You’re here, as an American citizen. First Amendment rights.”
Guts: “Yeah, yeah, yeah. Right. Both myself, and yeah, surely, you know, these guys, yeah, they’re, again…they happen to be there because of the capacity of their job. But we can talk about it because there’s nothing inappropriate that we’re gonna mention.”
JC: “Most people that have gone on camera with me or done interviews, officially, on record, the reason I can’t put it out is because they’ve asked me not to, because they’re still in their careers. If they’re in real high command, they don’t want it for that reason. If they’ve just starting out in their career, they don’t want it for that reason, a lot of times. So, it’s like, you know, I have to respect that, but at least I’m gathering the information.”
Guts: “Well, it goes back to stigma, too. Again, it’s not accepted everywhere, in all circles, that you can talk about it. And again, if somebody really wanted to pick a bone with these guys, you know, I’m sure they could. But in terms of, you know, no, there’s nothing that they’re…they’re not breaking any rules, you know, by talking about it.”
JC: “So, I’m still unsatisfied that these are just a foreign nation’s drones. So we’re gonna continue down this. This one’s really interesting. This is a new witness, also, from Paul Hamilton, that gave us a number of quotes, talking about drones at sea, in general, on that deployment. Let’s talk about that.”
~Audio Begins~
DRONE TALK
I've always suspected that U.S. Navy personnel, in 2019, would know what drones look like and what drones are capable of. Listen to this witness for yourself. Is the July 2019 swarm event a drone case or a UFO case? Both?#ufotwitter#uaptwitter#UFO#ufospic.twitter.com/eUhjByPImg
JC: “So, on one of the videos that I released, our government said that this was evidence of a trans-medium vehicle, something going into the water. One of these objects that you were able to see from your ship, it actually went into the water. Did you see that at all?”
Eyewitness 2 (E2): “I didn’t see anything go into the water like that, if that (video of Omaha sphere possibly going into the water) is actual clear footage from a vessel. At that point, it’s different than what I saw, whenever it goes into the water. But I will say that its movement is exactly why we made the first drone calls and when we were first being dismissed, when we were so adamant that they were drones and how it sort of is flying, and then suddenly stops like that, in a way that even, like a helicopter wouldn’t. And it didn’t seem like it was a very stable hover. And up and down in that same way, and it seemed like it would have that for an (Unintelligible. Maybe, “movement”?) as well. We did have conventional drones flown by adversarial nations and non-adversarial nations, as well, in our vicinity, throughout that deployment. That was why we were initially like, these are not aircraft that we typically deal with or see around here. And we had operated, I can’t tell you, I probably spent four months total at sea in that specific area, and before and after, and hadn’t…I didn’t see anything to that effect, flying with that pattern. And we didn’t see it over the course of the deployment, either, anywhere, so…”
~~~Audio Ends~~~
JC: “So he’s looking at the video from the USS Omaha thermal, and seeing it go into the water. You know, his point was, we saw adversarial, and our own drone technology. This was not that. So what did you get from it?”
Guts: “Yeah, that’s a big deal. Just what you said. You’ve got all these different data points. Okay, I’ve seen that before, I know what that looks like. I’ve seen this before, I know what that looks like. What we saw in 2019, in the summer, that doesn’t match, you know, these other encounters that we’ve had. Known encounters that we’ve had of, ‘Oh, this is drone from so and so.’ And, you know, or, ‘This is our drone.’ And you hear him talk about the movement, right? You know, even as a helo guy, I can tell you, you know, if we’re flying along, and I want to come to a stop, right, and I can hover, it takes time to execute that maneuver. And even if you try and yank and bank and, you know, come to as quick of a stop as you can, there’s still drift, there’s still momentum on the airframe that that drags you along, and it’s not an instantaneous stop. What he’s talking about what they saw, was. Stable hover, you know, following the ship, what have you, and then coming to a complete stop and maintaining a stable hover. I mean, nothing that we fly does that. So, that’s important to keep in mind.”
JC: “So drone just means unmanned. I’ve never been one to argue about that term. That’s a false argument. When we first reported it, it just meant it was unmanned. It doesn’t have like a, you know, a mouse in there. You know, it’s unmanned. What he said that was so important to me is that, we see drones, like, that’s something we deal with. It’s something that our military deals with. None of us are saying that’s not. Like, that is a real issue. This is not that. So we’re trying to figure out what this is. And now it gets kind of interesting, because we’re talking about capabilities of these things. This next piece is how they named them, drone classification, right? So I’m asking: How do you name them drones or whatnot? Let’s hear what this individual has to say.”
~~~Audio Begins~~~
JC: “Why do you think there’s this predisposition to refer to them as drones, or call them that?”
E2: “I mean, based on our understanding, the most reasonable explanation would be some sort of a drone or a UAV. And then you sort of go to the connotation that’s attached with calling them what they actually are, which is an unidentified flying object, a UFO. They are, technically that, but that doesn’t mean that they’re extraterrestrial. Like, that’s the connotation that comes with using that phrase, even though that is the proper phrase for what we saw and what we classified them.”
~~~Audio Ends~~~
JC: “So, he’s talking about classifying these as drones. I have something to add to that, but what would you get from what he just said?”
Guts: “Again, to me, you know, the subject of stigma is so, unfortunately, you know, I think that’s what he’s talking about there. You know, if you call it a UFO, which is what it is, right? It’s an unidentified flying object. There’s a lot of baggage with that. Hell, even UAP, you know?”
JC: “Because it makes people automatically think it’s extraterrestrial or something.”
Guts: “Yeah. Right, right.”
JC: “No one’s saying that.”
Guts: “No one’s saying that.”
JC: “But there’s some sort of stigma.”
Guts: “Absolutely. And, again, to distinguish between, you know, like we talked about before, how, you know, a helo would have to kind of come to a slow stop. And even a drone. It’s not completely instantaneous, you know, coming to a complete stop, like they’re talking about, so. No, it’s just, they’re calling it that because that’s kind of the baseline, you know…”
GK: “You gotta call it something.”
Guts: “You gotta call it something, right? And so it’s a baseline go to, to be able to say, ‘Well, I’ll just call it a drone,’ you know, and move on.”
GK: “And in response to our reports, we’ve seen some other fairly lazy media reports that come out and say, ‘Well, look, here’s the documents, they call them UAVs, they’re drones!’ It’s because you gotta call them something.”
Guts: “You gotta call them something. Just because they’re calling it that, does not mean that that’s what they were.”
~~~
JC: “Since I’ve spoken to one of the individuals whose job it was to create the designation that we’re seeing here today, which is UAS, Unmanned Aerial System. And I asked, I said, ‘How do you feel about that designation that you made?’ And this individual said to me, ‘That was my only choice. We need to call them something, and I was told by my command to find what is the current description of what we’re calling an unmanned aerial system.’ I said, ‘Are you are you significantly happy that that was a good determination for what you saw?’ [He said], ‘Absolutely not.’ So it’s just, yeah, you gotta call them something.”
Guts: “It’s a default. You gotta call it something. You can’t write, ‘blank.’ You can’t write, ‘UFO.’ You gotta call it something.”
JC: “Maybe they’ll start calling them UAPs now, I don’t know. So I just wanted to go into why these terms become caught on to, to propagate, when maybe they shouldn’t. Okay, the next one that I wanna go to is, you know, I’m very curious in this conversation about, is this what you consider a conventional propulsion system, right?. So let’s see what they have to say.”
~~~Audio Begins~~~
JC: “Can you tell me a little bit why this doesn’t fit with a conventional drone?
E2: “We were always trying to listen, and we couldn’t really hear anything, which is also different from what we’ve experienced with drones that are in close, as these appeared to be. You would hear something, a lot of the times.”
JC: “Like you would hear rotors, whirling of blades, something like that? Conventional propulsion.”
E2: “Correct. For like, more of a conventional drone, a national (?) drone. It would still have like, a low hum of an aircraft flying, which you would hear.”
JC: “And you don’t recall hearing that from these?
E2: “No.”
JC: “What else, in general, just doesn’t add up with the conventional drone idea?”
E2: “Just in general, we were a good amount off of land, and I’m not sure if I can disclose exactly how far away we were. But it was not a range that a conventional drone should ever be able to traverse, especially for the amount of time that we were seeing these. Nothing we know of can stay out here for that long. The amount of time that we were seeing them was well beyond…I mean, if they flew out there, they would probably need to fly back. So I know that it wasn’t a civilian…it absolutely wasn’t civilian, because there’s nothing available or even that you could modify to do what we saw.”
~~~Audio Ends~~~
JC: “So he’s having problems with just like, the drone classification, because by the proximity to this individual and the people that he was with – and they’ve had a lot of these experiences, as you’ve heard – they didn’t have the typical sound that you would hear from any of these. And that’s one aspect. And then he’s talking about durational flight, right?”
Guts: “Yeah, it’s a big deal. You know, even on the deck of a ship, you know, you’ve got the wind noise and the waves crashing against the hull and all this and that, from personal experience. I can tell you, you can still hear the whirring of blades or, you know, like he talked about the hum of a drone. You can still hear that cut through the din of all the other noise. That’s one aspect that’s important to keep in mind. They didn’t hear any of that, okay? And, something that’s not mentioned in that clip that I know, guys that I’ve talked to have said, ‘These things got so close to the deck of the ship or to the ship’s superstructure, I could have taken a softball and chucked it out and hit it.’ So that’s close, okay? If something was that close, you would hear it, number one. Number two, just the distance, the sheer distance that these things were being observed out at sea. You know, again. Hell, let’s call it even thirty miles, you know? If a ship is out to sea at thirty miles, that means this thing, at a minimum, had to have flown sixty miles to get there and back to wherever it was coming from, right? Because, like we talked about before, I think we’ve established pretty clearly, it was not coming from the Bass Strait. But again, noiseless and the distances that we were seeing them, or that they were seeing them, encountering them out at sea”.
JC: “So we have noiseless, we have instantaneous motion.”
Guts: “Yeah.”
JC: “We have the idea that they can somehow become trans-medium. All of these things are adding up to like, I’m not…”
GK: “They’re not trackable, too. They appear, they disappear. You didn’t track them coming in.”
JC: “Low observability.”
Guts: “Low observability.”
GK: “You didn’t see where they went or where they came from.”
Guts: “Right, right.”
JC: “Okay, so I’m starting not to believe bad magazines like the New York Post, right? I’m starting to find that the case is not solved yet. Let’s continue (laughs). So this is cool. Another aspect that didn’t kind of add up for me…because everything takes power out there. Wow, I’ve started to hear this a bunch. This individual was witness to what was a spotlight so let’s listen to what they have.”
~~~Audio Begins~~~
JC: “Tell me about the spotlight. I’ve got a lot of reports about this, that were happening at that time.”
Eyewitness 2 (E2): “At one point, one of them shined a spotlight on us, and just generally knowing the strength of the spotlights, I don’t think it could have reached more than, I don’t even know, maybe like a mile, which is very close for something like that to be. With the amount of illumination that we saw, it did seem like they were close. It must have been within that range.”
JC: “The spotlight Do you remember what color it was?”
E2: “White.”
JC: “Did the brightness or the strength of the spotlight surprise you at all?”
E2: “It did, yeah.”
JC: “And why is that?”
E2: “It was just, it was very bright and it was completely unexpected. And this was maybe the third night that we had been seeing these aircraft, whatever they were. And that was not something we had previously experienced.”
JC: “Was this an intermittent thing, did it strobe, was it steady, about for how long?
E2: “It was probably a two-second illumination. It was pretty bright, because on the bridge of a ship, we keep it completely dark so that we can see any light, anything possible at night. It went from pitch black, to very illuminated, very quickly.”
JC: “Interesting.”
E2: “Yeah, so that was a bit jarring, shocking. I’m not sure if that…it should have been longer, if that’s been reported elsewhere. But that definitely happened at least once on my watch and was something we saw.”
~~~End Audio~~~
JC: “So some of these swarms, some of the these individual objects would just light up the ship like a spotlight. And that’s something that we continue to hear.”
GK: “Why does that stand out to you?
Guts: “Well, so, look… Sure, conventional, typical, you know, commercial, off-the-shelf drones, I’m sure they’ve got the capability to have lights on them or whatever, okay? But you got to think of it in the context of this description: A spotlight that he says, you know, it’s pitch black outside, and all of a sudden…in speaking to some of these guys myself, you know, you hear them talk about it, and it’s like, ‘I mean, dude, it was bright as day.’”
JC: “He was surprised by how bright…”
Guts: “Surprised at how bright it was, okay? And then you talk about the duration, you know, because at least two seconds. And again, for someone who’s maybe not familiar, they go, ‘Oh, well it sounds like a flash,’ right? Like the flash of a camera or something. Well, no, the flash of a camera is, I mean, almost instantaneous, right? Shuttering on and off. A two-second illumination for that large of a light, illuminating that size of ship, as bright as they said it was, that’s just so not typical of something that we would encounter, regardless of drones in the area. I mean, for your ship to be illuminated like that…I don’t know, a flare of some sort would have to be used. But even that’s like, you know.”
JC: “We keep hearing this. It’s like people will hold their hands out in front of their face and not be able to see their hands. It’s so bright. So whatever this is, has high power and it’s not being, it’s not being, umm. It’s brazen!”
Guts: “Yeah. It’s brazen, and the other thing you gotta remember, it takes energy to be able to produce that strength of light, right? So now we’re talking about a drone that can fly tens of miles out to sea, on its own, stay on duration for hours at a time. It’s noiseless, okay? It’s performing maneuvers that are just, you know, almost unbelievable. And now it’s got a spotlight, so it’s got even more energy now to be able to produce a spotlight for, you know, for two, three seconds to illuminate an entire Navy warship like that? It’s really not adding up to what people would think.”
GK: “It would be incredibly disconcerting that these are unknown craft, small, maneuverable, they can come in and out of the water, and then it’s messing with you. It lights up the whole bridge of the ship., That’s scary. But you’ve heard other incidents like this.”
Guts: “Oh, no. Yeah. And it’s not the first time that an object has illuminated a Navy…in fact, on another deployment, somewhere in the world, this time on a much bigger ship, an LHD (Landing Helicopter Dock), which for someone who doesn’t know, it’s kind of like a…when you look at it, it looks like an aircraft carrier, but it’s not as big. But it’s a kind of a mini-aircraft carrier. Big, big ship, though, okay?”
~~~
~~~
Guts: “And no, some sailors that I’ve spoken to, personally, they talk about being out on deployment, in the middle of the night, they’re standing bridge watch. And all of a sudden, you know, on the horizon, they see a light, kind of flicker on, and all of a sudden, start tracking towards the ship. And then as soon as they lose sight of the object over the ship, presumably, directly over the head of the ship, all of sudden, it casts this light, that again, is, like Jeremy mentioned, is sobright, and so blinding that they’re disoriented within the bridge of the ship. Because again, it’s at night, it’s pitch black outside. We keep the ship bridge dark at night on purpose to preserve your night vision, right? And then a huge spotlight that just illuminates everything, whereas if it were daytime. And this particular case, it wasn’t two seconds. It was enough time for the sailor to, you know, they talked about being so disoriented that they’re kind of putting their hands up. That’s what she talks about. She goes, ‘My hands were in front of my face and I couldn’t see. It was so bright, I couldn’t see my own hands in front of my own face.’ And they talked about being so disorientated, they’re kind of like getting their bearings and putting their hands up on the consoles to kind of brace themselves, you know, in the bridge of the ship. And then, (snaps his finger) boom, it just shuts off like that.
JC: “The object came in and…she was so great about it, she’s like it, ‘It left at a different speed in which it came in.’ Because what happened was, it hovered, shot the light, and then (snaps fingers), zoom, gone. It’s just interesting.”
Guts: “Again, it just speaks to the unconventional nature of this encounter and others that we’ve had.”
GK: “Hopefully I’ll get one of those next Christmas, Jeremy, I can get one of those drones. These are super-duper drones (JC and Guts laugh).”
[the_ad id=”1724″]
JC: “It’s so hilarious that people keep trying to dismiss it that way. And remember, you said small a second ago. Remember, we know the size. I mean, these were significant, physical objects. I’d say ten to fourteen (feet) is the best estimate from each person with the data. We might even know a little bit more about the Russell soon. So, no matter what the shape, or what these vehicles were, they were substantial. But we really got into, right now, what people are saying, is that the ship called the Bass Strait launched, you know, these objects, these units, okay? And that’s been now propagated, and it is 100% false and I want to hear from somebody who has direct knowledge of this. And that’s why this is the next little bit of audio. One of the duties of this person was to monitor the Bass Strait in real time. And let’s see what this person has to say.”
~~~Audio Begins~~~
JC: “I want to talk about origin. There’s been a lot of talk that these objects,, if not launched from land, that they were launched from a merchant vessel. So the Bass Strait is…a lot of people are trying to pin this on the Bass Strait. Can you tell me a little bit about that, about origin, and what you know about the Bass Strait?”
Eyewitness 2 (E2): “This was the closest that we ever came, on our ship, to figuring a possible origin outside of coming from land somehow. Like you said, traversing those thirty to fifty miles that we were from the nearest islands. So, at one point, we did see what look like multiple-air contacts around a merchant ship that was operating in our vicinity of our strike group. And it was a foreign-flagged merchant ship and we reached out to them. They denied. They weren’t a vessel of interest that we had been worried about or anything. But, I think it was like five to ten of the aircraft circling around it and we never saw it actually land on this vessel.”
JC: “Was it your impression that the contacts did not belong to the merchant vessel? And can you verify that you asked the merchant vessel and they denied that they were theirs?”
E2: “Yeah, I can verify the latter, for sure. And that was also why I sort of skirted around saying many details about that merchant vessel because I’m not sure where the investigation went afterwards. I sort of helped compose the message that we sent off, because I’d seen it and like I said, we didn’t see them land on it. And that was what we really wanted to see. Like, we really wanted to see either a launch or a landing. We didn’t know if possibly this vessel had a foreign nation’s intelligence detachment on board or something like that, doing this. They did deny they were the source and they also never landed or launched them, so. We really wanted to see that because we just wanted an answer because we were tired of it. It was not launching, it was not receiving the drones as much as we wanted it to. We were like, ‘This is the source. This has to be it, we finally figured it out.’ And it seemed like it probably wasn’t, just based on the fact that we never saw them land or take off.’”
~~~Audio Ends~~~
JC: “Why is this important?”
Guts: “You know, and again, this kind of goes back to the, you know, the warfighter in all of us, you know? Like, you’ve talked about before, you know, you’ve spoken to folks who, you know, they’re not happy with how this unfolded, you know? We’re out there, we’re trying to do our job, and yet we’re getting peppered, almost like we’re in a boxing ring getting jabbed. Getting jabbed, getting jabbed, getting jabbed, and we can’t punch back. And so, finally, like, you hear, and I can commiserate with that feeling of almost, not helplessness, but just frustration that you’ve got a job to do, we’re all trained warfighters to defend the country, but each other and our ship, right? And we’re getting harassed by these damn things. And finally, we see, ‘Oh, okay, aha! There’s the culprit right there, and we’re gonna query the hell out of them and tell them to knock it off or whatever the case is,’ right? And what do you hear that guy say? He goes, ‘So we finally see them there. And we wanted it so bad for it to be the source of our frustrations over these past few nights,’ and not once did they see anything either land or take off from this merchant vessel. So, it just speaks to the…I feel bad a little bit, you know, because I can hear and I can feel and I can commiserate with the frustration expressed.”
JC: “He wanted an answer.”
Guts: “He wanted an answer! You know, he wanted an answer, and it’s almost like, you know, you’re harassed by these things for so many nights in a row, and finally, you think you’ve got that answer and then, the carpet’s pulled from underneath you, you know, and it’s not.”
JC: “So the big thing for me is that people can just make up any shit they want and they can publish it, and it starts to be trickled down as truth through tabloids, all the way to Wikipedia, and it’s bullshit. And it’s direct bullshit. And knowing that, is one thing. You (Knapp) and I will know certain things, but getting somebody who’s there, whose job it was to watch the Bass Strait, make sure it was not the source of these. Now we finally have that person on record, verified, that was his duty, and he, sadly, can’t report to us that this was some sort of adversarial drone being launched off this ship. Which, of course, it wasn’t, with over a hundred, in a hundred-mile radius, right? That never made sense. This excuse, that, case closed, never made sense. But to get it through, you have to hear from people directly there.”
GK: “We also know that there was further investigation, that the Bass Strait was in port when this was still going on. That it was not responsible for launching what was buzzing around these ships.”
JC: “So you and I have already reported on that numerous times, and now let’s just give it one more go. Which is that we have direct information and knowledge of who and how the Bass Strait was investigated, after the day of events, and they were determined not to be the place of origin, landing or launch of these hundred-plus units in the hundred-mile radius. So guess what? Case open and now we have to kind of think a little bit further. But just to kind of show that this individual can talk to us about it, I just wanna play one last little quote.”
~~~Audio Begins~~~
JC: “Did anybody ever say to you, ‘Don’t talk about this. This is a black project, we’re testing our own technology. We don’t want people to know about it. Don’t talk about it’?”
E2: “No, I’ve never been spoken to, really, about the event, until now.:
JC: “No one ever had you sign an NDA or a Page 13? No one ever gave you a verbal order, direct or indirect, or otherwise that you can’t talk about it. Is that correct?”
E2: “Correct.”
~~~Audio Ends~~~
JC: “So why are we doing that? Just to make sure everybody understands, this is not like some off-the-record kind of, like, you know, he can talk to me, this is absolutely fine. But it’s so much clearer that I’m really grateful that some people are letting us, you know, share this with the public and whatnot. So, George and Guts, is this case closed, have we figured this out?”
Guts: “No, in my opinion, absolutely not.”
JC: “Right, right.”
GK: “No, we don’t know all the central questions: Whose they were, who was operating them, where they came from, where they went to, what their total capabilities are? These are not any kind of drones or AAVs or UASs that we are aware of, that our military’s aware of, so all the big questions about them are still unanswered. It is not a case closed, it is not a case explained, it is an ongoing mystery.”
JC: “So the great UFO swarms of 2019 still need to be investigated. No answers have really been given, in a way. Now the thing that really takes it and elevates it for me is the performance. When you talk with the people that were there, you know, regardless of shape, we’ll get down to the nitty gritty of that maybe when there’s more information that comes out. Although, the idea of it, is that these had performance capability that I hope, I wish, that we had as a country, but this is not a performance capability that anybody has ever seen before and this is what really makes it interesting to me. A mystery.”
GK: “2019 was a big year for a variety of reasons. We haven’t even talked about what started us down this road, is that, on the East Coast. So, Oceania, this gigantic Naval Air Station. I reported in 2018, I had been hearing from Naval aviators and sources that they weren’t flying out of Oceania into the w-72, which is the training area in the ocean. And every single day they were seeing these unknowns, and it was a legitimate security issue, aviation-safety issue, because they’re flying along and there they are. And the Navy, the UAP Task Force, what became the UAP Task Force, is trying to encourage these aviators to go ahead and report it. And I know, when I said it in 2018, I don’t think anybody believed me, that they were seeing them every day, but it was true, and it came out later.”
JC: “Right, it sounded like too much, but then you turned out to be correctly reporting the information.”
GK: “So in 2019, at the urging of some Navy officials who were working on the UFO investigation, UAP investigation, some aviators finally went along with the program and took some pictures. They had a cell phone and they took some pictures. And on one flight, this one crew captured images of three different objects. And they don’t look like the Starship Enterprise. They’re odd looking. One of them, the Navy called it ‘The Acorn.’ Other people, after I put the image out, they tried to call it a Batman balloon, It was not a balloon. It was not a balloon, And they call it The Acorn.”
~~~
GK: “Then there was one that just looked like a sphere.”
~~~
GK: “And then the third one that was labeled ‘Metallic Blimp with Payload.’”
~~~
GK: “And again, they didn’t have amazing characteristics like the ones on the West Coast, but they would sit there for days at a time, right off the coast, obviously doing some kind of surveillance of the training exercises and the base itself. And it was disconcerting to the Navy that they would sit there. They could sit there for days at a time, at 30,000 feet in 120-knot winds, and not move!”
JC: “That’s what something that Lieutenant Ryan Graves has brought up and other people that actually have dealt with this issue is, the durational capability is astonishing. Look, this is somebody’s technology, and I’m certainly not pretending to know. I don’t know if these UFOs are from another world, another planet, extraterrestrial. I’ve never said that. I don’t know.
GK: “I got these images, by the way, at a briefing, two months later. And I sat on them because I didn’t think I was authorized to do it. And then people started talking about it in public, the Batman balloon, and I figured, well, I went back to the sources [to] see if I could make it public and did. And, you know, that was sort of our first foray into what became a heck of a year reporting because that led then to the West Coast videos and images that we got. And at the same time, East Coast, West Coast, far, far away, at the same general timeframe, in that same year, there was another incident that you guys know pretty well.”
JC: “Yeah, let’s talk about that. Right before we hit that, I just want to say now, so that people are aware that this will be coming out with us: There were other swarm events of UAPs, whatever you want to call them, UFOs, that happened also on the East Coast and also around the world, other seas. This is something that I have direct knowledge of and we’re going to break that story. We just want people to grasp this 2019. Hey, don’t just, you know, believe these tabloids stuff, get in there a little bit, here’s more information. There’s a lot more to this story and this type of event series. But I like where you’re going with this conversation.”
GK: “This is a really disturbing incident that we got ahold [of] before anybody knew about it and it was reported, and then just dropped, and ignored. It’s in Guam.”
JC: “That is true. And I found out that my buddy over here (Guts), was there. So I think that you’re probably the best person to speak about what we’re talking about.”
Guts: “Yeah, so you had reached out to me about an incident that you’d become aware of , and yeah…”
JC: “You see how he’s already…he doesn’t proactively tell me, ‘Hey, man, I heard about UFOs.’ It’s like, I have to find out the story, and then I’d be like, ‘Hey, man, can you tell me, did anything like this happen?’”
Guts: “Yeah, so in terms of stuff that I’ve seen, and people like to ask me all time, ‘Have you seen anything?’”
JC: “Yeah, that’s what I want to know. Have you [seen] anything?”
Guts: “Let me start off by saying this: Yeah, sure, there have been things that I’ve seen flying, certainly at night you know, on NVDs, on Night-Vision Goggles, that, you know, lights that you see that are kind of weird and unexplainable, but nothing that I would consider the mothership, you know? Certainly nothing like you’ve heard.”
JC: “Just things you can’t explain.”
Guts: “Yeah, just things you can’t explain that definitely make you scratch your head, but then you’ve got a mission to do and you go and do the mission. Unfortunately, you don’t have a whole lot of time to investigate, and we’re not UFO hunters, as much as we might want to be.”
JC: “You’re not, maybe I am (JC & Guts laugh)! Come on, man!”
Guts “So we’re out there, I’m out there in Guam, [and] there’s a Navy squadron stationed out there on an Air Force base, and we had become aware of an incident that…or incidents, I should say, that had occurred over a span of a few nights, over a particularly sensitive area on Guam.”
JC: “Why is it sensitive?”
Guts: “Well, out on Guam, they’ve got a – and this is public knowledge. I’m not disclosing anything here – there’s what’s called a THAAD missile battery out there. I think it’s Terminal High Altitude Air (It’s Area. ~Joe) Defense system, I think is what it is.”
~~~
Guts: “I think the Air Force and the Army, it’a an Army/Air Force, jointly run…”
GK: “Anti-missile technology?”
Guts: “Yeah, exactly. So it’s defense capabilities, right? And I think that’s all I’m comfortable to say beyond that. But nonetheless, it’s a defense system that we have. Guam, in and of itself, has been a strategic military location going back to World War Two. So there’s a THAAD missile battery out there, missile-defense site out there. Well, in early 2019, our squadron was approached by the Air Force because what had been told to us was that there had been these, I guess you call them incursions, of lights, over the THAAD site, okay? And what really kind of struck all of us in the squadron, you know…because we hear about this thing, lights, and everybody right away starts talking, ‘What the hell, what do they want us to do here? What are they talking about?’ Well, what was interesting, [and] what we would talk about in the wardroom was, again, the witness descriptions of these particular lights, okay? And what they were seeing was…the guys that are standing guard duty out there, were seeing, first what started as a light that just all of a sudden appears on the horizon, okay? They described it as coming in at treetop level. And all of a sudden, it starts approaching their position, okay? Again, coming from over water, because, you know, Guam’s an island, surrounded by water. So really, any direction that it’s coming from is coming from over water. But in the particular direction it was coming from, yeah, it’s coming from over water. Treetop level, and it’s approaching their position. And just as they’re starting to get on the radio to kind of start communicating with one another about, ‘Hey, do you see this light? Where’s it going? We need to figure this out.’ It blinks out. Well, it blinks out and then about two, three seconds later, it all of a sudden, pops up (snaps his fingers) over here. You know, ninety degrees offset from the original direction. So if you can imagine a light seen at your 12 o’clock position, it blinks out, and then a few seconds later, it pops up at your nine o’clock position. Is it the same light? Is it a different light? How did it move from here to there so quickly?”
JC: “This troubling because this is a very restricted area…”
Guts: “Oh, this is a very sensitive…100%, a restricted airspace. Even us as the helicopter squadron stationed on Guam, there’s what’s known as a TFR: a Temporary Flight Restriction. Well it’s not temporary, it’s always out there. It’s a constantly-active TFR, where you are not allowed to fly within a certain radius of this area. Mainly for the emissions that are getting radiated out of this site. It can mess with your electronics, it can mess with…at least, certainly, our systems in the helicopter.”
JC: “So like, if somebody had set-up, like a, you know, a commercial drone to do surveys, just the energy output of this area would would mess with those, likely?”
Guts: “Presumably. I mean, that was the reason why we were never allowed to fly in and out of there. And also, you know, you can never determine when a missile would be shot off, and so, God forbid, you don’t want to be in the fire zone of this thing, in case you’re flying through. So we always had to skirt around this thing and fly around it, We always knew where it was and we always made sure to stay outside of this.”
JC: “Okay, so this is a big deal. There’s something being flown in this restricted airspace.”
Guts:: “Yeah, it’s a big deal.”
JC: “And it’s weird because you’ll see a light, and then immediately, at a 90-degree…”
Guts: “Well, so what ended up happening over a couple nights in early 2019 was…these guys were essentially involved in a cat and mouse chase with these lights, okay? And the guys on the ground, over the THAAD site. It’s funny, you know, similar to 2019 (West Coast ~Joe), they’re getting harassed by this thing. They can’t figure out where it’s coming from, they can’t figure out where it’s going. So they enlisted our help in trying to figure out what these things were. The Air Force didn’t have any rotary-wing assets out there to be able to…they didn’t have any helicopters out there to be able to chase these things, but they knew we were out there. And so they said, ‘Hey, Navy, can you guys help us out here? We want you guys to…’ What we ended up doing was, after three or four nights of harassment, they finally got fed up and said, ‘You know, we need you guys to help us out.’ What they asked us to do was stand up what’s called an alert, right? So, we’re at the end of our flight day, whatever it happens to be, we had a crew, specifically designated every night, to stand this alert, where, if we got a call, they would want us to launch and try and find these things, right? And just essentially observe and report. Really, their desire would be to eventually knock it down, if we could, but we didn’t have any of that sort of technology on the helicopter at the time. And so, that’s really what it was. It was stand up an alert, if we get the call, go and see what you can find out.
“And sure enough, there were a couple times that we were given the call. And in fact, there was one night where me and my crew and the other helicopter that we were flying with, we were doing training out in the southern end of the island, and it’s the end of a long night and it’s about ten or eleven o’clock at night. We’re heading back to the base on the north end of the island, which is next to the THAAD site where these incursions had been happening. And it just so happened that we were out there at the same time that they got one of these calls. They go, ‘Hey, they’re back. The lights are back.’ [We say], ‘Okay, what do you want us to do?’ [They responded], ‘Well, just, you know, they’re over here and we want you to go check it out.’ But again, all the while, maintaining…we’re staying clear of that radius, of that TFR that’s always out there. And I wish I had more of a dramatic account to talk about, but long story short, we go up there to try and find these things, and we couldn’t see them. The guys on the ground insisted that, ‘Hey, they’re right over here. Okay, now they’re over here.’ Again, this cat and mouse game going back and forth. Well, we never saw anything, we never saw anything with our eyeballs, we never saw anything on our night vision goggles. We never saw anything on our FLIR, that we have on the helicopter, Forward-Looking Infrared. We never saw anything.”
JC: “You should have been able to see these objects?”
GK: “On sensor systems.”
Guts: “On some thing, if you were to… Again, the guys on the ground were so emphatic that they were seeing these things, you would think that we should have been able to see something, but we never could. That flight was not the only flight where we launched on these things. There were other crews, other nights that got launched. And again, it was always in the middle of the night. The earliest it ever happened was maybe ten, eleven o’clock at night. but typically it was around one, two, three in the morning. So…yeah, we had other crews get called up and get the call to launch. They would fly out there, chase this thing around, or try to, anyway, but we never saw anything.”
GK: “Around the world, as I’ve reported, there have been instances of UFOs that have been over missile sites, including nuclear missile sites, American, Russian. And they’ve interfered with the launch-control systems. There have been dramatic incidents where it’s direct interference.”
Col. Boris Sokolov interviewed on the Ukraine nuclear incursion by George Knapp.
GK: “Is there anything like that that happened with this THAAD system, or could you even say?”
Guts: “Not that I’m aware. But even if I was aware, I don’t think I would be comfortable talking about that. But not that I’m aware.”
GK: “But the fact that whatever this unknown surveillance system, if that’s what it was, was taking such an interest in that facility? It’s a critical…”
Guts: “Yeah, because there’s, you know, if you look at Guam, there’s multiple bases throughout the island, right?. You got an Air Force Base to the north end where we flew out of, there’s a Navy base in the south. In fact, there’s even a submarine base on the southern end of the island that subs go in and out of. So, there’s multiple…I mean, there’s other high-sensitive units and platforms in and around…”
GK: “But it was all there.”
Guts: “But it was always, all there.”
~~~
GK: “Again, just to characterize it: Guam is such a critical, national security facility but it’s like the frontier, it’s like Fort Apache. You’re the first line of defense if bad actors from that region of the world fire something this way.”
Guts: “Yeah, absolutely.”
JC: “I think we’re dealing with a lot of different truths, right? There are incursions of…even just, you know, drones with tape on, you put on some weaponry, and you fly it into a base. That happens all the time. You know, I have individuals that I know, their job is to defend certain bases, from that, when they’re overseas. A buddy of mine, at twenty-three miles away, was able to target in, using an aerostat with a thermal camera. It’s like, basically, a floating platform, weapons platform. And at tweet-three miles away, it was able to disable a drone, instantaneously.”
Guts: “Wow.”
JC: “There’s apparently no issue that we have. There’s Return to Sender, which sends the bomb back. So, we are dealing with that. That is something we will increasingly deal with when it comes to our technologies. However, we have to really say that the things we’ve been talking about, they don’t fall within those explanations. In fact, they kind of mimic what has been going on with the UFO phenomenon, you know, since the beginning of our military. This is not a new thing. Pyramids, spheres, cubes and cigars are the common shapes of UFOs, and these have been seen by our military throughout the entire time. And that’s just something you (Knapp) and I know through all of the information that we’ve had. So I just…I think that we have to be very careful to dismiss things because these new techs are coming up and it’s so easy to call it something that’s, you know, it has a certain type of maneuverability as a commonplace thing. So I’m really grateful that we were able to kind of, in my eyes, unsolved the case. It was bothering me (laughs).”
GK: “Let me ask…this is like, call this weapons porn. But I had a question about, you know, me as a civilian, I’m thinking: They’re flying over our ships, over our bases, shoot those damn things down. And I was thinking about this Navy-weapons system, I’ve seen video on YouTube. It’s almost like a super Gatling gun, that is an anti-aircraft system. I don’t know what it’s called.”
GK: “Well, I was thinking of the guns that shoot like a thousand bullets in a minute that would just, basically, knock down a missile.”
Guts: “Okay. CIWS, a close-in weapon system. So basically, it looks like an R2-D2-type thing on it, yeah.”
GK: “So that could clearly take one of these things down (Guts laughs), shouldn’t it?”
Guts: “Yeah. Again, look, I’m not a CIWS expert, I’m not a Surface-Warfare Officer. I’m sure we could easily find someone to talk on that. But, presumably, yeah, I mean, in theory, yeah, you got something that’s flying around your airspace and you don’t want it to, there are ways to take those things down.”
GK: “Just thinking, at some level, there are investigations into this UAP mystery, we know, and some of them are sincere and people are there who want to get to the bottom of it. And some that just sort of wanna cover it over and wallpaper it, and make it go away, I think. But, you gotta think that there’s people in the Navy, and maybe the Air Force, that are sitting around thinking, ‘These damn things keep flying over our bases, we sure would like to shoot one of those down and see what the hell it is. Don’t to think?”
Guts: “My opinion? Yeah, it’s frustrating. You know, especially again, with that warfighter mentality, you know, you want to be able to punch back. You know, if you’re getting just peppered in the ring and not able to throw a counter punch, it’s frustrating.”
GK: “And then you gotta worry, well, do we set off an international incident, or more importantly, an interplanetary incident? We shot down Meep Thorp from Krypton or something like that (Guts laughs).”
JC: “I wanted just to, also, thank you for talking with us, and I just want to kind of hit the nail on the head here, which is that: I mean, you’re my friend and I like calling you and telling you some of the stuff that I’m learning and passing it by you, and it’s exciting. I appreciate that part of our friendship.
Guts: “Sure.”
JC: “I do, you know, have concerns, though. I mean, you know…or I did for you. Like, you’re an active commander in the Navy and there’s stigma associated with talking about this. And I know we’re just talking right now, you know, everything we’re seeing is personal opinion, right, between us. But do you have any kind of concern that that stigma would affect you or that there’d be any reprisals because you’re talking about this with us? I mean, it’s a hot topic right now, within our Department of Defense, is UFOs, UAPs. Just as an individual, you’re talking with us, but do you have any concern?”
Guts: “You’re talking about blowback or something like?”
JC: “Yeah, explain it to me.”
Guts: “No, no, no, no, no. Look, not at all, man.
JC: “You’re immune to the…”
Guts: “Yeah, no, well, look, it’s not that…look, it’s like this: The stigma is real. I think conversations like this help to fight and reduce that stigma, which hopefully would encourage folks if they do have some sort of, you know, weird encounter, would report it, right? And bring it up to somebody who can try to get it up the proper chain of command.”
JC: “Through the proper chain of command and stop calling me (Guts laughs). No, no, I want people to.”
Guts: “But no…look, I’m not afraid…look, part of my part of my training as a helicopter pilot was also that as an aviation safety officer, okay? And for those of us that have been through that course…there’s a lot of courses in the military that they send you through, you know? Some more robust than others, some more menial than others, and there’s a lot of real dry topics out there. But this one in particular, the aviation-safety-officer course, for me, anyway, it really changed…we’re always safety conscious, you know, we always try and do things as safe as possible. But man, going through that course really kind of drives home the point of aviation safety, looking out for your brothers and sisters in the air, mitigating risks as much as you can, and making sure that at the end of the day, you know, you go out over the horizon [and] you come back with everyone that you left with. And so, that course in particular really, really drove home the point of, hey, when there’s an issue, when there’s an aviation-safety concern that puts your fellow brothers and sisters in harm’s way, you gotta deal with it.
“And to me, I see this UAP issue in general, in the same light. There is an aviation-safety-flight concern. It should be addressed. We shouldn’t be afraid to talk about it just because it’s a little weird or it’s unknown, or we don’t know what the hell it is.”
GK: “It’s a national-security issue.”
Guts: “It’s a national security issue. We shouldn’t let that…because of its inherent and weird nature, we shouldn’t bar that from trying to figure out what this is. Again, if for nothing else, for the safety of those that that we send up…people who put their lives on the line every day to go up and defend the country. So no, in terms of blowback? No, look, I’m not doing this on behalf of the Navy, by any means, but in general, it’s what they trained me to do.”
GK: “We’re getting close to the end here. I just give props to the U.S. Navy for being so forthright on this, for leading the charge.”
Guts: “Yeah. yeah.”
GK: “I mean, you know, you and your colleagues talking about…and I know a career Navy guy (Jay Stratton. ~Joe) who was part of AAWSAP and AATIP and the UAP Task Force. He has led the charge towards changing Navy policy to encourage aviators to come forward. So glad, that somebody is doing it because, you know, as we’ve remarked, some of the other services are not so…are a little more reluctant to get involved.”
~~~
Guts: “I’m proud. I’m proud of the service I’m in, I’m proud of the career I’ve had. I mean, I’m not done. I’m proud I get to do the work I get to do and I’m glad that the Navy is, you know, seems like they’re taking steps to address these issues.”
JC: “Well, I’m glad that you’re, you know, willing to have the conversation. We made the joke back and forth, it’s like, if we were both into chess and we just wanted to talk about that, that’s no problem. But, for some reason, this this idea of like…UFOs have been with us forever, this idea that unknowns. Why can’t we just talk about it like we would any other subject?”
Guts: “Right.”
JC: “So that’s what we’re doing. We’re doing what we’re hoping other people will do.
Guts: “Yeah.”
JC: “I do gotta say, though, that, you know, it’s great…so the Navy has really spearheaded coming forward, and we see so much progress. We see this whistleblower legislation that has just, you know, created this opportunity for people to come forward about the UFO topic, who work inside and that kind of thing. So you see all this progress being made, but I was so disappointed when they did the hearings. Just to be clear, we presented, you know, nine pieces of corroborative evidence. They took that hearing and they just showed one piece and tried to pretend that that was the totality of the 2019 events. That was so disingenuous to Congress.”
GK: “There are those who’d like it to go away, they’d like the media attention to stop, they’d like conversations like this to end. The closer we get to the goodies, the more pushback there’s gonna be. Media and other places.”
JC: “Yeah. Well, thanks so much, man. It was good to hang out and I’m glad we finally got to have this conversation all together.”
Guts: “I appreciate it.”
JC: “Hopefully, it sheds a little light on all this information that we were able to get. And I suspect, there’s going to be more coming from us.”
As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.
“It’s happening every week!!! You know, they put something up from 2019, 2020, something that they knew was already out on social media and people looked at it, and they could just go ahead and say, ‘Here’s a video.’ No, no, show the real video. Show the videos that we know are there and because I’ve seen them. Show the videos that you know are being reported almost on a weekly basis. Report those. If I had the opportunity, right now, if you said, ‘Lue, you have no more nondisclosure agreement to worry about, you can speak your mind,’ people would be blown away.”
~Lue Elizondo
~~~
If you like what you see on my blog, my Twitter and YouTube Channel and appreciate the time and effort, here are links to my Patreon, Pay Paland Venmo. I appreciate any and all support. Without that support, I would struggle to do this as much as I do.
Well, Lue, welcome to “Need To Know,” and I wish I could say it was a very positive day that we’ve got this hearing happening before Congress, but frankly, I think it was a big pile of steaming bull dung. What’s your take?
Lue Elizondo (Lue): (laughs) Well, Ross, look, very much like the 180 day report, let me, if I can, be as fair as possible. When the 180 day report first came out last year, it kind of fell with a thud, and people, I think, were underwhelmed, initially, with that report, not realizing there was a greater purpose. I think very much the same case here. Let’s, if we can, dissect this a little bit. And forgive me for getting a little bit into the weeds but it’s important. I think a lot of people feel exactly the way you do. I’ve heard it from my colleagues in Congress. In fact, some of the reps (in Congress) are literally spitting on the floor and throwing chairs, right? They’re very frustrated (This explains the very bold language in the 2023, IAA and NDAA ~Joe) Individuals in the government, individuals that were associated with my former program, are all kind of looking at this and saying, “Wow, that was underwhelming.” But let’s look at this for what it is. First of all, this is the first hearing in over 50 years, half a century, where senior members of our government testified before Congress. So there’s no putting the genie back in the bottle now. Two: Where before, during Blue Book, Operation Blue Book, where you had this, and the program Blue Book, you had senior members of the Air Force testifying. Now you have senior members of the Department of Defense testifying, so another level even higher than that, and the senior most intelligence officials in our national security apparatus, testifying on UFOs. And what did they say? They said it’s real, and they said, it’s a national security issue, and we don’t know what these are. So, that’s what they did say. Now, a lot of times, it’s what people don’t say that matters even more.
I also want to let you know, and your audience know, that I think it’s fair to presume here, that there’s going to be some more hearings. This was just the first hearing. I think it was very pro forma (made or carried out in a perfunctory manner or as a formality). To me, I wasn’t surprised. This was Congress painting a box around the Department of Defense and the intelligence community, saying, “Okay, what is the baseline of truth, what do we know, what don’t we know, and what are you doing about it?” Right? Knowing full well, Congress is very well informed, these guys are no fools. They’ve received the briefings, they know exactly what’s going on. They’ve been talking to their constituents, former military members, current military members. They asked very, very good, very precise questions. Now, the response to those questions, were very underwhelming. And I agree with you, wholeheartedly, there was a lot of bureaucracy and political considerations that were discussed, and frankly, there were a lot of contradictions. I wrote down everything. And what I did is I went ahead and looked at all the things that they said, the things that they didn’t say, and the contradictions.
Look, I think The Department is in a very precarious situation right now because they said a few things for the record that they can’t take back. You know, let’s hit those wave tops for a second, Ross. The Wilson documents – something that I’m not at liberty to discuss – were submitted for the first time as public record. I mean (Ross laughs), I wouldn’t want to be in that hot seat right now! I mean, I know what I know, and, you know, whoo! I wouldn’t want to touch that hot potato with a ten-foot pole, and yet, here we are. It’s part of now, public record. Holy smokes, dude, right?
RC: Now Lue, just for a moment, just for our audience, I’m just going to quickly explain to our audience: The Wilson documents, record an alleged conversation between Dr. Eric Davis and Admiral Tom Wilson, the then, recently-retired director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, where Tom Wilson describes attempts that he purportedly made to discover a secret program inside the U.S. Defense Department, which was hiding Special Access Programs, code-word programs, that were concealing an alleged craft retrieval, back engineering program. Correct?
Lue: That’s what the document alleges. And, you know, Congress now is looking at that. Now, that goes to a bigger point, Ross. Look, Congress asked them, “What are you doing?” And it was actually Congressman Gallagher – and by the way, I gotta applaud his courage for doing this – asking specifically, “What are you doing to collect past information that the U.S. government has collected,” right? And the answer was, “Nothing.”
Lue: So, they acknowledged AATIP was real, and they acknowledged Blue Book was real, but there’s 45 years in between where they have admitted we’re not doing anything to go back into our records and collect any information on what we’ve already done. In essence, forget about the millions of dollars we spent of your taxpayer money, we’re just going to reinvent the wheel here and pretend like we never did that. So, that is also problematic. I think that is going to be something that the DoD is going to be held accountable to. So that also happened. Then there was the topic of crash retrievals. Now, something I’m not at liberty to discuss.
~~~
I've finished digitizing and OCR'ing Stringfield's 380 page fine print tome. His life's work was on Crash Retrievals. I'm likely the only researcher in the world that can hit 1 button and rapidly search this book (and some of his other works) in seconds. #ufotwitter#uaptwitterpic.twitter.com/rOVQ8LY9rL
Lue: But what I can discuss is what was said today. They were very careful how the DoD responded. They said the [UAP] Task Force…the Task Force has no recovered material. How long has the Task Force been around? Exactly one year and nine months. Okay? So, you’re right, the Task Force doesn’t have it. Probably someone else does. And furthermore, when you look at what they said, as far as the Task Force is concerned? Just a few months ago, when they were asked how many people are permanently assigned to the Task Force, they said, “Two.” Now! Now, we have assessments being done, analysis being done, we have collection strategies being done and collection requirements. We have worked with our international partners. We have 400 cases we’re working! And oh, by the way, don’t forget, we’re working with our academic and scientific communities. With two people. You see the problem that?
Bryce Zabel (BZ): (laughs/scoffs) Lue, it was kind of shocking to hear, I think it was Gallagher, who said he wanted to put the Wilson memo in without objection, and nobody objected because I was pretty sure nobody knew what it was.
Lue: Yeah.
~~~
Gallagher also entered into the record a copy of unverified 2002 meeting notes referred to as the “Admiral Wilson memo” that purports to reveal government officials and contractors discussing how they have been blocked from accessing information about crashed UFO materials pic.twitter.com/65G0erFyuc
BZ: I mean, do you think that he made that statement, and offered it into the record without anyone else knowing he was about to do it?
Lue: You know, it was clever if he did, but, you know, I’m not surprised because DoD didn’t know a lot of things. Malstrom, for example, right?
~~~
~~~
Lue: The response to Malmstrom was, “Well, we don’t look at outside sources. Well, hold on a second. You’re the source!
BZ: You’re the source! (laughs)
Lue: That was a DoD, IIR! You guys wrote it! It got released through FOIA, you have your own commanders coming up and telling you about it. What do you mean you’re not talking to outside sources! You’re the source!!! (all laugh) So, I can’t believe they were saying this for the record!
BZ: How does that happen? How does history get ignored to such a degree that you bring two people in, they know that they’re going to have to testify before Congress, they’re under oath, and they’re not briefed? And they’re not up to date on the biggest cases? And if we’re talking about national security? I think we’ve all agreed, nuclear weapons are a national security issue with UFOs.
Lue: That’s the crown jewels. The crown jewels! The nuclear triad. Absolutely!
BZ: How could they not know? How is it that this happened, on the inside, that such a faux pas could actually occur?
Lue: Well…you know, that’s the bigger question. Are we talking about…it’s one of two things. It’s only one of two things. Either A: They’re lying, or it’s B: Gross negligence. Choose your poison, I don’t really care, but both are not a good situation to be in if you are in the national security apparatus. And by the way, Congress already knows! So, this is becoming a big frustration, as you see, like with Representative Tim Burchett.
~~~
The UFO hearing this morning was a total joke. We should have heard from people who could talk about things they'd personally seen, but instead the witnesses were government officials with limited knowledge who couldn't give real answers to serious questions. pic.twitter.com/hddRYupW3u
— Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office (@RepTimBurchett) May 17, 2022
~~~
.@LelandVittert asked me why Congress held a hearing on UFOs when our country is dealing with so many other crises. It's because this is exactly the sort of thing the House Intelligence Committee is supposed to deal with. Unfortunately, it still didn't give us any answers. pic.twitter.com/wSjK8LzAKV
— Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office (@RepTimBurchett) May 19, 2022
Lue: These guys aren’t stupid! They’ve already…they already know the truth. And so, when DoD comes out, and they kind of do this soft sell, they don’t realize Congress is painting a box around them. Because the next time, and the time after that, and the time after that, there’s more hearings – which, by the way, I think there will be – you’re gonna have more witnesses coming forward. And then, they’re going to contradict what was just said today, and someone’s going to have to be held accountable, or hopefully they have another job by then.
RC: Now Lue, one thing that I want to ask you: When I first interviewed you last year, we talked about the quality of the videos that you’ve seen that you can’t talk about. Now, that video that they showed last night, I know for a fact, I’ve spoken to other people who’ve told me what they’ve seen in the Congress, in the private hearings, they’ve told me they’ve seen far higher resolution videos, better quality videos. Is this bullshit? Did they put up a completely bunkum, bogus, useless video?
Lue: Yeah!!! I mean, it’s happening every week!!! You know, they put something up from 2019, 2020, something that they knew was already out on social media and people looked at it, and they could just go ahead and say, “Here’s a video.” No, no, show the real video. Show the videos that we know are there and because I’ve seen them. Show the videos that you know are being reported almost on a weekly basis. Report those. If I had the opportunity, right now, if you said, “Lue, you have no more nondisclosure agreement to worry about, you can speak your mind,” people would be blown away. And so, this is part of my kind of frustration. It actually makes me sad that the DoD is painting themselves into this corner because it makes them look incompetent. At the end of the day, the truth is coming out, whether an undersecretary wants it or not. Look, undersecretaries, no offense, but you guys come and go. The citizenship doesn’t. Citizens and concerned people don’t. This is what’s important. So, you know, there’s an old Bob Marley adage that goes, “You can fool some people sometimes, but you can’t fool all the people, all the time.” And that’s what’s going on.
Look, Ross, you know what I’ve been through the last four years. When I came out, you know, it’s the typical cycle of going through some sort of traumatic issue. First, you have disbelief and denial, then the reaction when I came out, you know, “We’ll just ignore Lue.” Then it goes to, well, anger and we’re gonna go ahead and discredit the guy.
~~~
Today, when asked if Elizondo ran AATIP, a pentagon spokesperson said, “Luis Elizondo had no assigned responsibilities for the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP)while he was assigned to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence & Security
Lue: Thank God I’ve got a letter from Harry Reid stating the record who I am, because, if it was up to the Department of Defense, not only was AATIP not part of…didn’t do anything to do with UFOs, which, by the way, that got cleared up today, finally, you know, but I had nothing to do with it. So, these are the missteps that, from a strategic communication perspective, continue to happen, and it’s breaking my heart. Because I was part of DoD, and that’s not the DoD I remember. The DoD I remember was very methodical, very precise, and now what I see is this…almost mass chaos where the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing.
Lue: You know, I made a few quotes here. One of the things that was very interesting here…they want to identify known unknowns and avoid technical surprise. Another quote is, “We’re putting all hands on deck on this.” Which, I guess you mean four hands, right? Because you’ve got two people, so, you’re putting exactly four hands on this topic. Great. Thanks. It’s unbelievable. 400 hundred reports, right? So we had 144 during the 180 Day Report. Now you have 400. And oh, by the way, 11 near misses. Now, I think that’s a problem. I also think it’s a problem that we’re not going back in time and looking at all the information the U.S. government has in its possession on this. There are a lot of pockets of expertise. That Wilson memo…let me tell you something: That thing isn’t going to die. That thing is now out for the public and that is going to start a firestorm…one in which I can’t comment on. But, you know, DoD should have saw this coming, and they should have done their best to try to to alleviate the concerns of Congress.
~~~
~~~
RC: Lue, can I ask you this? I like Tom Wilson, I’ve exchanged communications with him.
~~~
12 Admiral Wilson's June 2020 letter 2 @rosscoulthart included this, regarding the W/D memo:
"The entire memo attributed 2 Dr Davis, including his characterization of my attitude, emotions & sentiments about other individuals is pure fiction. Many of the people (Oke Shannon,
RC: [Admiral Tom Wilson is] an honorable man. People speak very, very highly to me of Tom Wilson. My understanding is, though, and tell me if I’m wrong: If you are aware of a Waived Unacknowledged Special Access Program (WUSAP) – something that’s hidden, the darkest secrets of all in the U.S. government – you’re obliged to lie about them.
~~~
“You’re going to be lied to because that’s the rule.”
~Dr. Eric W. Davis
www.ufojoe/net/wilsondavis1
~~~
There's a reason I started off my W/D megablog with that quote from EWD. Think Admiral Wilson & his repeated denials. Not saying it proves anything but please THINK. #ufo
Lue: It gets even worse, because, let’s say, hypothetically, and I’m just saying hypothetically, here: If that document is legit, the way in which that document found its way to where it did, the FBI would probably launch, immediately, a full-field counterintelligence investigation. Because that’s not necessarily the orthodox way to capture this type of meeting minutes. (According to the memo/notes, Dr. Eric Davis interviewed Admiral Wilson in a car, parked in the EG&G parking lot in Las Vegas, on October 16th, 2002o. ~Joe) And the fact that a conversation like that may have occurred, if it did occur – in a car again…I’m being very careful what I say here – you know, there’s a lot of people that have reason to be concerned. Now, does this happen every day? Yes, absolutely. These senior people that are going to sit there and try to turn the screws, they’re guilty of it, they do it all the time. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been in the back seat of a limousine or a car and people are just having classified conversations, senior leadership. So, it’s a little bit disingenuous. But, there’s real reason to be concerned here. And I understand why, if there’s legitimacy to that – and again, I’m being very careful here: If there’s legitimacy to it – why a lot of people would be very concerned right now because it could predicate a very intense, criminal investigation.
BZ: Lue, I think that’s fascinating as a story, no matter how you look at it, but one of the things that I keep thinking when I’m hearing you talk is, the people at the Pentagon, as you just said, ought to have their act together about this. They’ve seen this train coming for a while. They’ve been told that, you know, the report comes out, they get told they’re going to be here for hearings. So the Pentagon strategically decided, these are the two guys that should come out there. They should know X, Y and Z but not A, B and C, or whatever strategy. Why would they pursue a strategy that puts people out there who appear to know nothing about the history of the situation? Why would they do that?
Lue: Because one degree of separation is a good thing, you
have plausible deniability, right? So you have someone testifying under oath who can’t lie. Hey, if they don’t know, they don’t know! So, they’re not lying. When they say, “Look, we don’t know,” they’re being truthful.
~~~
Excerpt from my June 2020, Wilson/Davis Megablog…
In late 2009, [Leslie]Kean asked [Retired CDR Will] Miller for his overall assessment via email. He wrote, “It’s fact there are folks high in our government who are interested in the subject of UFOs and in many cases, that’s due to them or an immediate family member having a sighting or personal experience with the phenomenon.” He believes many personnel in the highest level of our government, military and intelligence agencies are in the dark when it comes to information about UFOs. Why? Plausible deniability. If they’re asked what they know about the subject, they can say, “Absolutely nothing” and be telling the truth.
~~~
RC: But Lue, give me this reassurance, because one of the things I watched this morning was a Fox News interview with Representative Krishnamoorthi and also, representative Gallagher.
~~~
Fox News – Your World with Neil Cavuto – UFO hearing a long time coming, House Intelligence Committee members say. Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., and Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., discuss the first House panel hearing on UFOs in decadeshttps://t.co/4PLuO9fBHH
RC: And I think they acknowledged in that interview that they’d been snowed, that the committee was basically being treated evasively and there was obfuscation by the two witnesses. They know it, don’t they?
Lue: They do.
RC: But do you think there is the political will in the Congress to make public demands and to push, politically, for the Defense Department and the intelligence community to open up?
Lue: Yeah, I think they, if I could say the vernacular, I think they pissed off Congress. That’s never a good idea. You know, Congress has got a lot of power and normally, they’re busy fighting with each other. But, you know, this is a bipartisan issue, and this isn’t gonna go away. There’s a lot at stake here and there’s a lot of people now in Congress that know exactly what’s going on.
BZ: Well Lue, I have to, you know, on the political part of it, I kept thinking to myself: Gillibrand and Rubio and the gang in the Senate had to be watching these games being played this morning…
Lue: Oh yeah.
BZ: …and having their own opinion. And people do like to say that it’s bipartisan. I mean, certainly you got Rubio/Gillibrand, that’s bipartisan. The guys in the committee even complimented themselves on being bipartisan. But, I don’t know that it necessarily sounded 100% bipartisan. The Republican who lead off, seemed to be saying, “You know, I don’t believe in this UFO crap that much, but China and Russia, I’m very interested in that.”
Lue: Sure.
BZ: They even had one guy, I think it was LaHood, who made it sound like he was going to pick up Coulthart and Zabel and waterboard us if we tried to report anything more on this. And the Democrats didn’t quite seem that way.
~~~
Cued up to the LaHood segment…
~~~
BZ: So, I’m wondering, are we seeing the beginning of a political difference between the parties on this because we live in such a polarized country? Is ufology and the UAP issue…is it about to be politicized?
Lue: Really thoughtful question. You know what? I don’t think so. I think they’re all doing their due diligence. They’re trying to approach this from a very matter-of-fact, perspective, which is something I’ve always been a proponent of. Just the facts, ma’am, nuts and bolts. I do think that, you know, there are individuals that have served…I think that individual that spoke said he was a former pilot for the military. So, it’s no wonder they’re taking this from that perspective. I don’t think it’s a political thing. I don’t think it’s a partisan thing. I think there are just as many people on the conservative and the liberal sides that agree, both from the profound, existential aspect of this…potential, existential aspect, all the way to the nuts and bolts, national security, is this a threat. So far, I haven’t seen…now where the politics do come in play is when they have to hold feet to the fire to the Department of Defense. Nobody wants to look silly or stupid and that’s why you heard Carson say in the beginning, he says, you know, “These witnesses were formerly treated as kooks, and we need them treated as witnesses.” Carson is absolutely right. That is exactly the way we need to treat this, and that’s starting to happen. Now, I think, frankly, Moultrie and Bray were a little bit, how shall I say, eager to say things that they plan to do that I’m not sure are really going to come to fruition. They said a lot of nice things, but so far, it hasn’t happened. Look, they just now announced, I think, the director, today.
BZ: Who did they announce and who is he, and what do we know about him?
Lue: Well, I don’t want to speak for the government. My understanding, it’s Sean Kirkpatrick.
BZ: Okay.
Lue: But, you know, that’s not formal. That’s not from me, that’s not official. Let me just caveat that.
~~~
On the UAP/UFO investigatory office, Undersecretary for Intelligence Ronald Moultrie today told a U.S. House subcommittee, "We have, as of this week, picked a director for that effort– a very established and accomplished individual." My May 12 report:https://t.co/RF8FbN0yqe
RC: And is he a good hand? Is he a good hand, Lue?
Lue: Boy, Ross, you’d have to ask me that (This tells me that Lue may have some problems with Kirkpatrick. ~Joe). I believe let’s give everybody a fair shake. How about that? Right? Let’s see what they can do. You know, this is part of my frustration. This is why I do what I do, because I think that people deserve the truth.
BZ: Is it at least good that they finally appointed somebody? Is that progress?
Lue: Yeah!
BZ: Yeah, okay.
~~~
Update: It’s official...
DoD, July 20, 2022: UnderSec for Intelligence Ronald Moultrie "named Dr. Sean M. Kirkpatrick…as the director of [Pentagon UAP office]."
On May 12, 2022, I was the first to report on Dr. Kirkpatrick's selection to head the UAP office, in this profile:https://t.co/RF8FbN0yqe
The DoD announces changing AOIMSG to the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO). Dr. Sean M. Kirkpatrick, most recently the chief scientist at the DIA's Missile and Space Intelligence Center, will be the director of AARO.https://t.co/XW26JNfUP8
— Scientific Coalition for UAP Studies (@ExploreSCU) July 20, 2022
~~~
Lue: Yeah. Now the problem is, they’re considering this air trash, space junk and debris, quadcopters and drones, when we’re really talking about breakaway technology. This isn’t…we’re not talking about…look, I hate to say this, folks, but at 30,000 feet, doing 2000 miles an hour, that’s not a quadcopter. Okay? It never has been, it never will be. So, if it helps you have the conversation by having these little anecdotes that we have drones and things? Fine, you know, what? If it helps the conversation in the short term? But, as these hearings progress, more and more details are gonna come out, more and more fidelity, where it will become very clear we’re not talking about drones and quadcopters.
~~~
Update: New legislation language has directed the new UFO/UAP office to refrain from investigating man-made objects.
This is a watershed moment. The Senate is explicitly stating that, of the three categories: “U.S., foreign, or other”, we have sufficient evidence of non man-made objects to mandate study of them by law. Listening yet? https://t.co/XIp9nfpBbQ
BZ: Which is a good point. The one thing that was said, over and over in these hearings this morning…it was like ninety minutes and it wasn’t even barely that. It was, as I think Gallagher said, he thought it was surprising and unsatisfying, right? But the thing that occurred to me is I heard them say over and over, “Well, we should take that up in the classified meeting, okay? That was said something like seven or eight times. My question, I guess, is: What do you think, knowing what you know, to the extent that you can tell us, what was discussed in that classified hearing today, given the things that you heard them say: “We’re going to take that offline for now, we’re not going to answer in a public hearing, we’ll answer that later, classified.” What were they talking about?
Lue: Great question, because it’s leading to, probably, the most important aspect of this entire conversation, in my opinion. I think that we’re going to talk about sources and methods. I think they were going to talk about our relationship with other countries. They said some pretty bold statements there. You know, they said things like, “Well, you know, we’re working with some of our closest allies, and we’re doing this.” No, you’re not. Nice try (laughs). Because, I know who is, and it’s not those folks. There are countries that still don’t want to have this conversation publicly and there’s countries that are willing to have this conversation publicly. I think some of that conversation probably occurred, and then probably some things they don’t want to discuss. They were very careful to say there’s people that are agitating this conversation, but they didn’t want to say who or where they were. I suspect in that conversation, they may have said, “Look, we’ve got this monkey on our back, you know, call the dogs off of us, because they’re making our lives miserable.” I suspect that may have been part of it. I also think, when they were talking about specific foreign countries that may be assisting with us, assisting our efforts? Look, working with our foreign allies is now law of the land. Okay? We are breaking the law if we don’t reach out to the five eyes, Australia, Canada, UK, New Zealand, and our closest allies, we’re wrong! We’re wrong. We have to do it. And so, when they say things that are open ended: “Well, we’re talking to some of our allies.” Well, what does that mean? I mean, are you picking up the phone and saying, “Hey, George, how you doing?” Or are you sharing information, intelligence, classified intelligence information, and are they sharing it with you, through the normal foreign disclosure mechanisms, and non-disclosure policy, NDP-1, which is part of how we work with our foreign allies?
I mean, there are very specific guidelines that dictate that relationship [and] right now, I don’t see it being done. Because I get people calling me from these other countries that are in certain positions, saying, “No one from the U.S. has reached out to us.” Canada just came out, very interestingly, and said…it was one of their congressional representatives, who I have to give credit to. Representative Maguire, up in Canada, is now finally coming out and really picking up the torch on this. Look, they’ve had incidents over in northern Manitoba. We know that. They’re concerned [and] they want to know what’s going on. And by the way, what can they do with the United States to tackle this problem? So, there are countries reaching out. Typically, and historically, Australia and the UK have been very loathsome to publicly acknowledge any interest. I get it, I understand it. But, at least in a classified setting, I think they should be more forthcoming and hopefully more enjoined to work with United States.
RC: Lue, I know you can’t talk about any evidence that’s been given in closed hearings…but, have you given evidence in closed hearings, before the Congress? Are you able to tell us that? And more importantly, is there any prospect at all that you would be deposed under oath, in an open, public hearing?
BZ: I’ll second that question.
Lue: The first question is, and I’ve always maintained, whatever relationship I have in Washington, it’s really up for that party to divulge. Just like I’ve been speaking to Mr. Maguire. I never acknowledged it until he came out and acknowledged it. That’s not my place to say. If people want to know what my dealings are with the U.S. government and Congress, they can ask the U.S. government and Congress and I’m going to just restrain myself from having that conversation.
Lue: Now, as far as going up to Congress, if there are more hearings, which I suspect there will be, you better believe it. I will absolutely go and testify, along with several of my colleagues.
BZ: And Lue, I keep thinking…because we’ve seen that you’ve had people personally attacking you on Twitter and things like that. And there’s been the documentary, so-called documentary that came out from Mr. Greenstreet (Lue laughs) over the weekend. And I look at those and I think, “I bet Lue would would love to be testifying under oath, because wouldn’t that allow you (Lue laughs) and force you to sort of prove your case, once and for all?
Lue: Well, but look, if you’re into tabloids then read tabloids. Twitter’s full of it, everybody knows it. There’s a bunch of hate…they’re called trolls for a reason. I don’t really care. You know, my focus is on the 99% of fair-minded, rational people out there that aren’t, you know, conspiracy-minded individuals. You know, I’m not doing this for me. Everything I’ve ever said has always come to fruition and has always checked out, without exception. Like I said, I had this document in my hand for a reason. I guess they’re calling the good senator a liar, too. And, you know, I’ve got lots and lots of documentation and email that will do more than satisfy who I am and what I’ve done. Brother, haters are gonna hate, and that’s because they have agendas and because, for whatever reason, they’ve made a little cottage industry since they were 15 years old on this stuff, and this is all they know. And by the way, if real disclosure happens, they don’t have a job! Because this is all they’ve been doing, their whole job has been disclosure. Well now that disclosure is really upon us, and we have public hearings, it’s, “No no, no! It’s all lies and obfuscation!” Because otherwise, they’re gonna have to get a job at Starbucks and get a real job. So, that’s the unfortunate side of this and I really don’t have time to get into the weeds with these people who cherry-pick information, because at the end of the day, they’re not journalists.
BZ: Nor should you, but I just wanted to share something with you because I think the personal…people feel like they know you now. I do. This the first time we’ve met on air or anything, except I’ve spent more time talking about you in a public forum than the President. So, you know?
Lue: Oh, no (laughs).
BZ: So here’s the thing that makes me wonder. I got a friend today who texted me and he said, this was the question he posed to me. He said, “Do you believe in Lue Elizondo?” He didn’t say, “Do you believe Lue Elizondo?” which would mean, do you believe what he’s saying is true? He said, “Do you believe in Lue Elizondo?” as if you’re Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny, or something. You’ve been mythologized by this process and what do you think about that on a personal basis?
Lue: This is why I’m getting out of social media, because the problem is that the messenger has been confused with the message, something that I’ve always worried about. I knew from day one stepping out on that stage, at some point, I may have to back off and continue working behind the shadows because I’d become a cult of personality. And that’s not what I want. I’m not one of those guys that just wants to sell you a subscription to one of my videos, or I need, “Hey, Like this.” I’ve never done that, ever. I don’t self promote. I live in the middle of nowhere, Wyoming. And the problem is that this topic is too important. Too many people have squandered the opportunity. They start with good intentions, they become cults of personality and now all of a sudden they’re starting to make money off it. It becomes a cottage industry, and it’s, “Don’t listen to anybody else. I have all the answers.” I’m not going to do it here but there’s a long laundry list of these hucksters and fraudsters out there and I will not be part of it. I’m not going to lower myself to that. That is the bottom of the barrel. Nobody cares in real life. Only people that are trolls and that are into that type of thing,
BZ: I would then have to argue, getting out of it is the last thing that you should possibly do. If in fact, those are your feelings, and you want to bring order to the town streets, then you can’t really back out. You’ve sort of made your case, and you have to stay and continue to make it, I think.
Lue: The problem with that is like being on a playground with a bunch of four year olds that hurl insults at you in mud. What are you going to do? You’re going to beat up a four year old? No, it’s a waste of time and energy, and frankly, they don’t know better. So, what I do is I focus my efforts on things like we have now with hearings, and mainstream media outlets where we can carry the message across millions, instead of, you know, a couple of dozen that are stuck in their own narrative.
RC: Now, one of the things that Representative LaHood gave the witnesses a free kick to was the UAP research community. And basically, the response that he got from Scott Bray was that these were spurious chases and hunts by the UFO community, by the UAP community. Can I ask you this? Do you think they are spurious chases and hunts? Do you think this is all just spurious chases and hunts?
Lue: No, absolutely not. No, there’s some very legitimate information out there. I think that’s a minimization. I mean, look, FBI has a hotline for a reason, to report crime. And we have, you know, crime busters, and we offer rewards because we need help from the public. It’s absolutely absurd and ridiculous to say that people into UFOs are, you know, providing wacky information. That’s not indicative of the entire UFO community, that there’s a couple of folks that are truly unhinged and need probably some psychological help, but there’s a lot of folks out there that mean well and have a lot of expertise. Whether as an investigator or with media, and cameras, and I think it’s irresponsible for us to simply say, “Meh, we don’t need a public cell.” I mean, look, you go to an airport or a metro right now, and what does the government say? “We need your help, see something, say something, report it.” And yet with this topic it’s, “Well, you know what? Don’t call us, we’ll call you.” So that shows the, again, the schizophrenic nature in which we are dealing with this.
You got it. Take care of gentlemen, thank you for what you’re doing. It’s really it’s making a difference. Thank you so much. All the best. Take care
As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.
Quick Take: Thanks to the work of Mick West (first suggested by @Flarkey) and a few other folks on Twitter, the lights in the video appear to be a reflection of the iPhone 13 Pro, autofocus system with LiDar. I think Ben Hansen should have been the one to discover that but he apparently missed it. But, as you will see, the pilot says he saw anomalous lights before he started recording, which would mean he saw something besides the iPhone autofocus lights. And whatever he saw, was visible to the naked eye. Plus, there may be other witnesses from other planes that were in the area. If that’s the case, it would confirm that something interesting was in the skies that night, off the coast of Los Angeles. If not, this may have been a big waste of time. It’s too early to tell.
~~~
~~~
From Ben Hansen’s YouTube:
A retired F-18 Marine Corps pilot was flying a chartered private jet en route to Maui on 8-18-22.He encountered 5 red, rapidly flashing objects that paced his aircraft for 15 minutes and performed circular motions to the side and over the top of his jet.This is a developing story, but we have pre-released ATC radar tape and radio communication exchanges with Los Angeles Center, ADS-B archival data, and footage from inside the cockpit.At least 2 other airline flights reported seeing the objects once they landed.We’re seeking information from any passengers or pilots on other flights in the vicinity.Media enquiries please contact Ben Hansen through benhansen.com.
Ben Hansen – UFO researcher – TV host of discovery+ UFO Witness, Ghosts of Morgan City, Fact or Faked, and host/producer of lots of other things that travel the airwaves
~~~
August 18th, 2022
Los Angeles area – Over the Pacific coast.
Ben has an advanced copy of the Air Traffic Control (ATC) radar tapes and radio chatter. He’s working on a FOIA request so he can also get a downloaded copy of that. Pilot was lucky enough to get footage, as well.
Retired F-18 pilot for Marine Corps – 20+ years experience flying F-18s and also Blackhawk helicopters. He has every imaginable certification license from instructing, to flying both in military and privatein the private sector,helicopters and jets.
He was flying for a private client from Miami Executive Airport and going to Maui, Hawaii. Around midnight on August 18th, 2022.
Flying into LA airspace at 47,000 feet, flying a Gulfstream G650, traveling .87 Mach, or 668 mph.
~~~
~~~
~~~
~~~
~~~
The pilot notices a group of 2-3 lights that he describes as red in color. They almost take on a pinkish/purplish tint in the video but that just may have been because of his phone. They’re pacing his aircraft. He just left the coast, is heading due west over the ocean, and the lights followed him for what he estimates was 15 mins. Ben spoke to him for well over a few hours over the weekend and he maintains that because they were pacing him and at an altitude above where he was, his best estimate (really hard to judge distance and altitude at night) is they were at least a couple thousand feet above his altitude. That could be 5,000-10,000 feet but he’s at 47,000 feet.
The Gulfstream 650 has a service ceiling of about 51,000 feet. Being a military pilot, he said it’s very unlikely that the jets that DO fly higher than that – the U2, or SR-71, which the pilot says do still fly (SR-71) every now and then – were what he saw. It would take a tremendous turning radius (like a whole state and width) to be able to turn around because of the speeds that they have to fly at those altitudes.
These things were doing circles and kind of orbiting around each other.
Ben asked the pilot if it was possible it was one solid structure and that they weren’t really orbiting but that these very-quickly-flashing, lights were maybe part of structure that was just in circular pattern? Pilot sad, “Well, maybe, except that while I was watching these, a 5th light showed up and the object descended and (pilot was hesitant to say this) it looked like a shooting star.It came down, joined the other four lights and they’re doing these circle patterns. They moved from the right of his aircraft, and above me, to almost directly in front of me, and then pass over the top of my plane so where I can’t seelooking at the cockpitI can’t see them any more. And then they move back to the right.” So, they didn’t ever go completely right to left, in front of him, but at some point they’re almost directly in front of him.
This really concerned him so he called Air Traffic Control (ATC) – LA Center, at 12:20am on the 18th of August, and he makes the report. The audio/video of that call may not be the full exchange. They have on their screen: The radar tape, which is kind of blurry. This is something that gets released to the public, but the ATCs were so excited about what they were seeing, when he landed, on their own, they took initiative to find him through his company, called him and said, “It wasn’t just you that saw these.” To pilot’s recollection, there was a United and Delta flight as well that had seen the lights but didn’t want to report it over the radio.
“We have multiple witnesses. This is not something occurring in the cockpit, like a reflection off the windscreen of lights inside the cockpit. Definitely not. Others have seen these and he called it in.”
Ben thanks ATC folks for taking the proactive step of contacting the pilot and getting the information out, and he appreciates that the FAA is taking an active interest in this.
The audio is played but it’s impossible to make out a lot of the early exchange because it’s not great quality.
07:21 – 11:34
Pilot: We have some aircraft to our north here, going around in circles. Any idea what they are?
ATC: No, I do not.
Pilot: It’s strange. They’re going around in circles, somaybe three aircraft.
ATC tells pilot they’re not entering any military airspace and then calls the boss, the operational manager at Los Angeles Operations Center. She tells her boss that the plane reporting the strange objects is 25 miles west of LA at 47,000 feet and, “[the pilot] said that there are three aircraft, high above him, orbiting, and I don’t know quite [what to tell him].”
Boss: “Well, that’s kind weird (laughs).”
ATC: “Should I ask him anything else? He said they were aircraft. I don’t have any hot air space.”
Boss: “I don’t know.”
They both discuss the possibility that these are satellites and she tells her boss that she just wanted to let him know what was going on and the call ends without him offering any advice.
ATC gets back to the pilot and asks for an estimate of altitude and if they are just white lights.
Pilot: “These gotta be at least 5,000 or 10,000 feet above us, on top of us. They just keep going in circles. I was an F-18 pilot in the Marine Corps and I’m telling you, I’ve done many intercepts and I’ve never seen anything like this.”
ATC mentions speaking to the operational manager and the only thing they could think of was satellites, “but I’m sure those aren’t going to be spinning around.”
Pilot: “Absolutely, they’re not satellites. They’re in a big, orbitaljust going around each other and then two more came in and then one came down from above them. They just keep circling.”
ATC. I did report it. I wish I could offer you an answer now but unfortunately, I can’t.
~~~
Ben: You could tell he was hesitant at first (I didn’t sense that from the tape. ~Joe), saying he had two or three craft above him. And then he asked the ATC if they had anything on radar. She said, “No, I don’t.”
(From what I heard, it didn’t sound like he asked about radar but the audio is so bad, it’s possible I misunderstood. This is what I heard. ~Joe)
Pilot: We have some aircraft to our north here, going around in circles. Any idea what they are?
ATC: No, I do not.
~~~
Ben: When ATC called her supervisor, she said she didn’t have any hot air space, which means there’s no military activity planned or that they’ve been warned of, in that area. Ben says, in the west, many times, off the coast (since he flies there a lot), there’s warning notifications put outNOTAMs (Notice to Airman)as to exercise those training routes and there’s nothing going on.
Ben: “[The pilot’s] credibility and what he was telling me about actual intercepts he has madewe’ll get into a little bit later in a different video. But this is the first time he’s visually seen anything.”
We can rule out satellites. This is not Starlink. “They look very, very different and travel in a single line. They can flash and shimmer but they do not do this. And they do not fly and change position fromlooking 5,000-10,000 feet above your altitude, to going in front of your plane, and then back again. Definitely not satellite activity that we’re looking at here. And it’s not something that he’s seeing in the windscreen because we have other witnesses.
~~~
Videos the pilot shot can be seen at:
16:28 – 16:42 and 17:02 – 17:16
He taped the primary flight display, which shows the altitude indicator and elevation and a whole lot more.For those who want those details, watch 13:53 – 15:38.
~~~
~~~
The footage isn’t spectacular because an iPhone, “doesn’t do well in low light. These lights are very bright and the flash pattern is not like anything conventional.”
Alleged UAP Footage #1 – 16:29 – 16:42
Alleged UAP Footage #2 – in Slo Mo – 17:03 – 17:15
~~~
“I know some of you who are really hard to please. I’m not here to entertain you (laughs). We’re really lucky he filmed anything. He’s got a lot going in the cockpit. He’s trying to talk to ATC, he’s trying to figure out how to get the best angle to film this.”
As he filmed the flight display and lights, the instrument shows he was 15 miles or so, southwest of the Santa Barbara Channel Islandsand it was 12:20am when he first started seeing these lights.
“Remember, they trailed him, they paced him for at least 15 minutes. 15 minutes, it’s matching his speed of his craft, and they’re dancing in front of him, going above him, [and] going back. You saw that zip by pretty quickly. So he’s witnessing this whole thing, trying to search and see where they’re at now, and he starts filming again.
18:38 – 18:43 – More lights, slo-mo.
19:42 – 21:32 – He’s 25 miles west of LAX (airport), roughly, and you see the city lights below. He’s looking due north, out the right side of his aircraft. Ben believes it’s probably the San Pedro area, looking into downtown LA but not quite as far as the Channel Islands.
~~~
“”The pattern is not easily explainable. Wow! The pattern seems to be: Either going around a solid structure – there’s a point where it looks almost triangular – to random, separate craft that are kind of joining together. So the best argument for separate objects is that that 5th light, which is not shown on the video, but he said joined, and it came down like a shooting star, and then joined the other ones.”
What Is It?
Drones? Okay. Going .87 Mach, or 668 mph. A conventional drone at that altitude (over 50,000 feet or so) and, “moving at that speed and not only moving forward with him, but then changing direction rapidly to come across the top of him and over the top in that turning radiuswe’re not talking about off-the-shelf drones.” If its foreign adversarial, “we’re in deep trouble if that’s somebody else’s drones making maneuvers like that. Because it’s gotta be using some alternative propulsion and inertia-displacing system.”
“We’ve got, very, very fast objects or object. “
23:07 – 23:46 – Interesting side note that the pilot pointed out to Ben while they were on the phone: Towards the tail end of that video segment, there’s a purplish/pink beam that appears to be coming down in the upper left quadrant. Ben’s initial thought was it’s some sort of a lens flare or a reflection caused by the windshield from a really bright light source in front of the aircraft. The Moon? No, because Ben reached out to Marc D’Antonio, MUFON’s chief photo analyst, and the Moon was in the northeast . Plane was heading west so very unlikely this was caused by the Moon. “It could be a very bright star, I suppose, or something, that’s causing that.”
“What we do know is that the lights themselves definitely are not reflections. We. have those two airlines…that had witnessed them. We DO know that they’re not showing up on radar, so whatever these objects are, being solid craft is an assumption, but they’re not showing up radar.So there’s some type of signature management or something going on to why, both his TCAS, which is his onboard radar, is not picking them up, and neither is ATC. Yet people, other pilots, are seeing them, visually, in the sky. ”
~~~
Ben continues to get more information on this developing story/case.
25:49 – 26:47 – Final (of three), brief video. Pilot told Ben he believes this video was the last time that, whatever this was, flew over the top of his craft. Just as the video is ending, they kind of disappear and are pretty much directly in front of him and go over the top of his plane, and he was not able to see them again after that.
To repeat: The duration of this event was 15 mins.
~~~
The ADS-B (see video above) is like a transponder and is now mandatory for most air spaces, for all aircraft to have. It gives you the identification of each aircraft. According to ADS-B, he was going due west. Delta 41 was also there and might have also witnessed this event.
ADS-B also shows there were no flight plans in the area just north of where the Gulfstream (featuring our pilot witness) was flying. No general aviation, military or commercial traffic in the direction (north) of where he took that video.
If you know anybody who was on the flights that left right before or after this event with the Gulfstream, and who may have also seen this: Fiji Airways Flight 811 – Air France Flight 78 – Qantas Flight 12 and United Flight 2650.
It happened between 12:20am – 12:40am on 8/18/22 – Contact Ben. He posts most of his updates on Twitter and Facebook.
~~~
The next day
Pilot lands in Maui and the ATC tracked him down and gave him a copy of the taped footage. “There is information, if true, that the actual tapes might be corrupted or deleted.” Ben says he doesn’t want to jump to any conclusions because that’s not even verified yet. “I would hate to think that it was deliberately done, if it happened.” Even Ben’s copy was somewhat corrupted so he doesn’t know what’s going on yet. ATC also gave the pilot a number to call to make report and he wasn’t sure who he was talking to, just that it was a government agency in Washington, DC. Ben traced down the number to the Joint Air Traffic Operations Command, or JATOC, Air Traffic Security Coordinator.
He thinks this is great because it shows the FAA is taking it seriously by kicking it up the food chain. They said they already had the radar tapes and the reports from ATC. Apparently, there was talk of them compiling this to include this in the Congressional data reports for the next round of UAP hearings.
Ben: Stay tuned bc things are about to get interesting in the next year.
~~~
All related tweets that folks might find interesting…
BREAKING NOW: Retired F-18 pilot flying a Gulf Stream on 8/18 encounters red, rapidly flashing UAPs pacing his aircraft for 15 minutes at Mach .87 circling and crossing overtop at +50,000ft. L.A. ATC radar tape & radio with video from inside cockpit. https://t.co/s4IKE3F9UK
This is a developing story, but at least 2 other airline flights reported seeing the objects once they landed. I'm looking for passengers and/or other pilots who witnessed the UAPs. At the end of the video I've identified commercial flights that may have witnessed them.
The Gulf Stream 650 is considered a "dark cockpit". The pilot explained that if anything is flashing, then it means there is a warning or malfunction. More importantly, the lights were seen moving from the right, to the front, to over the plane and other pilots reported them.
Noted debunker, Mick West, had a take on the lights that’s worth checking out. You can see the comparison below or by clicking on this link:
[UPDATE – the flashing lights in the video appear to be reflections of the iPhone 13 Pro autofocus system. First suggested by @flarkey]
~~~
I really do respect most of @mickwest 's contributions and this is something that needs to be addressed due to the similarity. In this case however, the objects were observed outside the cockpit for several minutes and the call to ATC before he picked up the phone to record. https://t.co/olgwmaMyeP
Can Ben confirm that this is the case? i.e. one assumes that once he got hold of the vid, he confirmed with the pilot that it was the flashing lights far left frame in the vid which the pilot was also seeing with the naked eye??
This is something I have an issue with also. Why position the object in the far left of frame 🖼? Is there a chance that the video doesn’t show what he saw/the object had gone by the time he took his phone out? The flashing lights really do like LiDAR reflections
Yes, there is always the chance that what he captured is not exactly what he remembers seeing. I've forwarded him the comparison and he's very open to consider it. It doesn't however negate his military flight experience or the direct visual that prompted him to record.
As this develops, I expect he will probably want to do an on-camera interview to address the sighting and recording as specifically as he can remember. He's adamant that what he saw before recording was spectacular and as he described.
Also important to the sequence of events is that he just told me he only first reviewed the videos after the lights had all disappeared. So he didn't know if anything had been captured in the camera as he was observing them directly fly over the top of his jet and back again.
The annunciators can be dimmed or turned off, especially when you're flying over the Pacific and need your night vision. More than likely there are also differences in the model versions. This was a 650ER.
Many criminal convictions don't succeed because the burden placed on technology to "witness" for us is impractical. Consequently, the value of eye witness testimony is diminished. As in all investigations, UAP accounts should be weighed by the totality of the circumstances.
And Mick West posted (as an attachment) the MUFON report filed by the pilot, as seen below.
~~~
~~~
I can confirm that someone from MUFON did contact him and interviewed him. That report does appear to be consistent with what he said if it was taken directly on MUFON's site.
Great effort by Ben Hansen, but again, thanks to the work of Mick West, @flarkey and a few others, the lights on the video appear to be a reflection of the iPhone 13 Pro autofocus system.
Ben said: The pilot noticed a group of 2-3 lights that he described as red in color. They almost took on a pinkish/purplish tint in the video but that just may have been because of his phone.
Well, I have no doubt that it WAS because of his phone: Those were the autofocus LiDar lights.
The pilot claims he saw anomalous lights, visible to the naked eye, in a circular formation, before he started recording. If true, then the pilot saw something different than what’s on the video and thus, that wasn’t captured on his iPhone. If not, we all got excited over reflections of iPhone lights. The key here is to see if any witnesses from other planes in the area reported similar, anomalous lights. If they did, it will go a long way to proving something interesting was off the coast of Los Angeles on August 18th, 2022. If not, this story will die a quick death. As Ben said, let’s wait until all the evidence is collected and then we can look at it in total.
I will add any important updates right here, as I see them.
~~~
Update – September 5th, 2022
~~~
Ben starts off by doing what I did to start off this blog the other day. And that is, thanking and giving credit to, Mick West for his autofocus/LiDAR explanation. When I saw the comparison, I had little doubt he and the others were right about that.
Ben Hanson (BH): “I do believe, at this point, that he is correct, in that…this little pinkish/purplish light that shows up and flashes in the videos that were recorded by the pilot, are in fact, the infrared, autofocus light that comes on and is sometimes seen in reflections of mirrors, and glass, if the conditions are dark enough. I don’t fault the pilot for not knowing this. In fact, I don’t fault myself. I like to think that I’m pretty up on technology and artifacts introduced in the cameras, however, this only came about in the past year or two when they started adding the autofocus and LiDAR technology to iPhones and smartphones, okay?
So, it’s something that we always have to keep testing and trying and, you know, trying to find out if we can explain, because technology changes so quickly. You also have to remember that what Mick West suggested the pyramid-shaped UFO, that they addressed in, actually, the UFO congressional hearing. This pyramid-shaped UFO that Jeremy Corbell had put forward, it was dubbed, pyramid-shaped…the pyramid shape. I took one of Mick West’s suggestions and went out with my night vision and re-created what we call the bokeh effect. So that, I believe, is why it is shaped in pyramid form. However – and this is really important, with this case as well – don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. Okay? Some of these cases have a lot of nuance, and we want the evidence to be in the video. We went it there, we wanna make up our minds. It is, or it isn’t extraordinary, and boom, case closed. Okay?
In the case with the Corbell video and the bokeh effect, my conclusion is the shape of it could very well be created by the aperture of the night vision. That does not, however, explain in my mind, the unusual flight characteristics of how long these drone swarms were in the area, the related thermal camera that what appears to be going down into the water, the fact that they couldn’t track these things and they talked about anti-drone technology not being able to bring them down. All of that is concerning, and is unconventional in my mind. It has not yet been solved. Okay?
So in this case, Mick West deserves credit and I think people should be open to any person who takes a rational approach and offers explanations, and take a look into it. So what happens, walking you through this really quick, I will put up the video here. You can see the video that he took of the city lights, he was trying to establish the city lights as he was setting up his cockpit for the next transition into the next radar, you know, airspace. And he’s setting up everything, so he’s busy in the cockpit but he’s scanning the skies. And the other video, he took a picture of his instrumentation to establish what was there. And in this case, as well, you can see that he wasn’t expecting to capture anything because the video’s shaky in the cockpit, and that’s when the pinkish lights, you know, are captured in the very corner. So what I was trying to establish in my questioning to him was: Were you actually, directly seeing the object, in the case like the video of the city, where you were then trying to record what you’re seeing? Are you seeing the same thing, at the time you’re trying to record? And he was very honest with me and transparent, and he said, “You know what? I don’t know.”
If you think about it, he’s got three videos less than a minute long, an event that happened fifteen, twenty minutes long. And so he’s really just trying to study the phone against the window, and take some video as he’s scanning the skies. Okay, so he’s looking up, he’s looking around, you know, it’s straining because at the top of the cockpit, the things are going up over him, and he wasn’t sure if he was capturing anything at all. So, having explained that, it seems very rational to me, but he’s very adamant about one thing: He saw objects that have no conventional explanation in his mind. His credentials as a military pilot, you know…he knows what should and should not be in the sky and the capabilities of different aircraft. And he’s seeing these things rotating around each other, above his altitude, going from right, to over the top, to in front of him. And it’s enough that he calls air traffic control, reports it, and all of this happens before he even picks up his iPhone to start recording. So, in my mind, these are two separate issues. He’s very adamant. In fact, he has what I call, witness remorse, right now. It’s been really difficult for him because he wanted it to be something in the video, he wanted there to be evidence of what he saw. And I said, “You know what? It doesn’t matter. You really should forget what other people say, You know what you saw. Separate the video apart from it. It would have been great if you did capture something.” But he’s kind of a changed, man. We can get into that later, but, he’s bought new cameras for his cockpit to film all the time when he’s flying. He really wants to capture something now, because he is disappointed, but that doesn’t change what he saw and what he reported. Okay?
So, where does that leave us now? We would love to find other witness testimony. I myself love corroborating witnesses, collateral witnesses, because the credibility of one, you know, very credible, in my mind, military pilot, is great, but it would be great if we had other aircraft who saw things in the sky. Well, we do. All right? Now, to set this up, I need to explain, briefly, I’ll pull up this map.
~~~
BH: This is a Los Angeles center, air traffic control sector map and we’re looking at Sectors 25 and 28. Okay, just off the coast, to the west of LAX, and Catalina, Santa Barbara, actually going all the way up to Santa Barbara here. This sector, obviously, it’s divided up because not one controller can handle the whole area. So, if you go to www.liveatc.net, there’s live feeds, okay? People/volunteers, they have scanners, radios that they feed into this website, and they’re capturing audio from air traffic control. The audio you’re about to hear is garbled, okay? It’s very low and I’m gonna have to boost it up. When I started out as a pilot, it took me a long time to understand anything that controllers and pilots said. So, even though I’m gonna try and transcribe a lot of what you’re hearing, there’s parts of it even that I can’t hear that are too scratchy. Okay, that’s because the scanners that are picking these up, sometimes, they’re only getting the most powerful radio signal coming from air traffic control, but they’re not getting the pilot side of the conversation. Because that pilot could be a couple 100 miles out over the ocean. All right? So sometimes you only hear what air traffic control is saying. That’s why we filed a FOIA request. Those audio tapes that come back from the FOIA, because it’s recorded at air traffic control facility, you’ll get the controller and you’ll get the pilot side of it. Okay?
So, having said that, American Airlines Flight number Six, coming in from Honolulu. And now, that one’s coming from west to east. It passes Twilight 670, which this pilot was flying out to Hawaii. I would say my best estimate right now, it was about 20 minutes, up to 40 minutes after when they pass each other. And now American Airlines is heading in. And I’m going to put that map up right here, so you can see it way out over the ocean (segment cued up below).
~~~
BH: There, you have Twilight’s 670. And you can see that American is passing, the opposite direction, United 2650. 2650, if you remember, was one of the airlines that I had highlighted before, that may have seen something. Air traffic control said that they were about 70 miles behind our pilot in Twilight 670. So, they’re trailing him, and they did make some radio calls. I won’t play it here in the interest of time. But the controller was asking them to be on the lookout for these objects that the pilot had reported. And at the end of it, United says they didn’t see anything. Now, I will point out, it may or may not be a factor, but you can see the altitude of United 2650 is 34,000 feet. So, they’re actually 13,000 feet below the altitude of the Gulfstream. And it may not seem like much, but five to 10,000 feet in altitude can make a big difference in what you’re able to see with air traffic when you’re flying around. And especially depending on the size of the objects. A typical-sized plane, that’s like two miles away, right? In altitude.
American Airlines, on the other hand, if you take a look at where they’re at, they’re 39,000 feet, which is only 8000 feet below Twilight 670. Or, in other words, like a mile and a half. So, quite a bit closer. May or may not have any factor in this as to why they were able to see something and United was not. But I’m gonna play the audio for you now, and I do owe another shout out to a YouTube user named PDGLS. So they made a comment on the YouTube video and pointed me to a compilation that they had made of air traffic communications that occurred up to an hour after Twilight 670 passed through. And it’s because of them that I went to the files. So again, this is going to be really low and garbled, but I’ll transcribe what we do hear, and then hopefully, when the FOIA comes in, we’ll hear the full communications from this other side. But what you’re going to hear, to me, is quite interesting (Cued up below).
~~~
Air Traffic Control (ATC): “American 6, LA Center. Earlier, probably about twenty minutes ago, I had an aircraft that was outbound at 47,000 feet, and they reported multiple aircraft above them, circling. I just wondered if you saw anything? That was probably between LA and Venti, they reported it several times, and they said that if you’re looking at the Big Dipper, it was near that.
Roger, yeah, that’s what we thought it was here, but the guy said he was a retired F-18 pilot, and he’d never seen anything like it, and it was definitely aircraft. So I was just wondering if you had seen anything. Roger, thanks. I wish we knew what it was. Yeah.”
BH: So the best we can tell that takes place at about 1:21am local time or 08:21 Zulu. And the controller, as soon as American Airlines enters her sector, updates him on the information because they’re in a good position to possibly see something. So, he kind of immediately responds, and we’re only hearing the one side of this, again, because the scanner doesn’t pick up the pilot side of it from this far out. But we’re left to guess that the conversation, from what she says, “That’s what we were thinking, too,” is referring to what I showed in the other video where we have her calling the higher up, her supervisor, and they’re kind of, you know, joking about Elon Musk, and maybe satellites or things like that. So, I’m guessing she…talking to the pilot, the pilot made the suggestion, it might be a satellite or it might be a rocket launch, and she says, “That’s what we were thinking, too,” okay?
Now there’s silence, for about 27 minutes until approximately 1:48am, American Airlines, on their own, is going to initiate contact with air traffic control, and this is the part where you can now hear the pilot speaking, but it’s going to be really low and I’m going to transcribe what’s going.
~~~
L.A. Center: American 6, go.
Pilot: Yeah, we’re seeing some bright lights now off to the north of us, well above the horizon. It gets real bright, and it gets dimmer. It’s in the same general area, but it’s in a different spot.
L.A. Center: American 6, roger. And you said that was to the north of you? And now long was that happening because I think that’s probably the same thing that other aircraft is seeing.
Pilot: Yeah, it’s not (unintelligible) continuously, but maybe 10 seconds apart. Umm, different brought lights come on, get bright, and then go dim.
L.A. Center: American 6, roger, thank you. I’ll report that because they were asking…up higher, if I had any more reports, so thanks.
Pilot: You’re welcome.
L.A. Center: And American 6, thanks for that. It has been reported and you can connect L.A. Center now, one one niner point niner five (119.95).
Pilot: Roger, niner five. American 6, goodnight.
~~~
BH: So there you have it, the straight up audio of what happened. I think it’s quite noteworthy for a few reasons. So, remember, the controller asked them at about 08:20, which would have been 1:20am, to be on the lookout because they knew that they would be passing through that same area. And it was about twenty something minutes before American Airlines comes back to them and says, “We’re seeing something.” Okay? So pilots, they don’t have the time or anything to just make stuff up or, you know, like, tell the controller what they want to hear. This is very serious when you’re talking to controllers and giving them information that could impact the safety of a flight. They know that’s what they’re looking for. And so, when they come up and say, “We’re seeing some bright lights, now off to the north of us, well above the horizon,” he talks about the lights getting really bright and then dim, and it’s in the same general area, I believe he says it’s not continual, or not continuous. We clearly hear that it’s in ten-second intervals. Now again, I hope that we get the FOIA request of the audio tapes will give us the other side of the conversation. But we get the gist of it.
~~~
~~~
BH: Now I’m going to overlay a map here (Map is Above) and you can see where American 6 would have been crossing. And in the same map, here you see the Gulfstream going the other way, and it was almost…looks like about an hour before. It would have been over an hour and a bit, before when they would have crossed that same area and where the Gulfstream first started seeing things. Now this is really interesting because even though the description is not that detailed, we don’t know if these lights were actually moving. We’re not going to jump to any assumptions here that these lights are explainable. But they were mysterious enough, that American 6 report seeing them, and tells air traffic control. And you can hear her say, “Yeah, well, the higher ups wanted to know more about this.” In fact, if we had time, I would play for you more audio, because she reached out to, like I said, the United flight and ask them, and also reached out to this plane right here.
BH: Now it comes up, initially, unidentified, and it has no call sign, which some of them don’t. But as they get closer, the ATS-B does provide that information.
BH: It says it’s a K35R. And when the information pops up, we see that’s a KC-135, and it’s owned by the Air Force. They don’t show a destination of where they’re headed, but they were coming out of Honolulu and the controller is now talking to them. So, they’re not going to provide any information, either, but she does provide a little bit more of the whole sighting and what everyone is seeing. So just for fun, let’s go ahead and play that.
~~~
ATC: Rummy93, I have a few aircraft that have reported a…multiple aircraft or lights in circles between LA and the Estel area. Could you let me know if you see anything like that? They said it was probably around 50,000-plus feet. That’s the best description I could get. One of the guys was a retired F-18 pilot. He said he’d never seen anything like it, but it looks like multiple aircraft going in circles at a very high altitude. Well, the most recent report was probably about 30 minutes ago, maybe 150 miles ahead of you. The report before that, he had reported it from, probably 20 miles west of LA, all the way to 280 miles west of LA. Headed west, reported it the north side of him. Said that it was near the Big Dipper at the time, but the sky has moved since then so I’m not sure exactly where it would be. Yeah, thank you. Let me know if you…
BH: So the audio is pretty clear on that, that’s why I’m not gonna attempt to transcribe it. And I want to, again, thank the YouTube commenter who compiled it because they took all the dead airspace out. So it’s really not in live time, it didn’t happen that quickly. Obviously, she’s hearing the pilot side of it. But there’s one part I do have of the pilot responding, but it’s unintelligible, it’s not even worth posting. But we’re led to understand that he did not see anything, okay? At the end of his leaving the sector. So well over two hours goes by the controllers calling out any airline who might be in the area pas sing through and transiting telling them to be on the lookout, giving them those reports of what the now two different pilots had seen things, the Gulf Stream, and now American Airlines reporting something very mysterious as well. At this point, we do not know if it’s the same phenomenon. So I have to stress that, because the characteristics, we haven’t talked to the American Airlines pilots, we have no information at this point. So they’re seeing bright lights that are getting really intense and dimming and Gulfstream is seeing objects that are going in circles and transiting from his right side over the top of his aircraft and pacing him. So could be two different things. We don’t know at this point, but very coincidental that it happens in the same area. And within probably less than an hour, that phenomenon is still occurring in that area. All right. So what does this all mean? Well, like I said, this is a developing story, I can tell you that. I’ve talked with people indirectly, who work in the control facility, and it would seem that we would be surprised how much activity is going on there. Our pilot spoke to Jay talk the next day in Pennsylvania, the joint Air Traffic Operations Command. And according to his recollection, there was some talk of how active the area is there as well. And if you remember to, he was told the next day, the the air traffic control, who tracked him down and called him said there were reports from other airlines. Now remember, go back and read or see the video if you want. But those other airlines, at least two were named according his recollection to different airlines who did not want to talk on the radio. Okay, so what I just played for you here is American Airlines who was on the radio. So it is possible, we’re looking at up to three different airlines at this point, who are reporting unusual activity, same night, same area. And it’s noteworthy enough that it’s come to their attention that this is significant, they can’t explain it. And it’s been reported to the higher ups. So that’s where it is. All right. So to wrap this up, I do have one more thing for you because I was getting tweets and messages from people saying, Here’s a video from tick tock, and I’ll pull that up right here. And and this comes from a pilot named Trent. Okay, and you can see his handle there flying high. Now, people this is really strange, because Mick West sent this to me and others, saying, is this your pilot? Is this the guy you’ve been talking to? Apparently, on August 10. This pilot and his captain posted a little video of them talking about a UFO sighting they had. All right, and then on August 17, he posted an update saying that part of his sighting was explainable as the IR light from their iPhone that was reflecting in the window. Now, August 18th is when the Gulfstream has their sighting. And as my feeling is right now, what was captured in that video was also IR light again, not discounting actually, you know, what he directly observed at all. But this was the same light, our Gulfstream pilot, same explanation that this IR light was causing that reflection, and which is very coincidental. Right? The both would happen kind of the same time and they both kind of figure out what what had happened there. But I will do a deep dive with Trent I plan on doing it might take me a week or two because I’m going to be out of town. I can guarantee you that people are going to be the site dissecting trends videos, because he had at least two incidents and one of them captured on camera where he was heading into lax about an hour out same location and almost exactly the same description the American Airlines had of this light that gets really really bright and then gets dim. Right. He saw this it one time heading into LA and then also So, heading away from Honolulu, a couple hours out, where there were multiple, at least three or four aircraft that were flying alongside of them, they talk plane to plane on a certain frequency. And they were saying, Do you guys see this? And they were talking about what they were seeing. And this video, like I said, we’ll be dissected. And probably people will put more emphasis on the video than the witness testimony is many do. But the fact is, people are seeing perhaps a new phenomenon we don’t know yet at this point. And maybe it’s explainable, maybe it’s not. I will say if you go and look at trends videos, he did mistake Starlink initially, which a lot of people do, and he’s, he’s very transparent about things that can be explained. And so, at this point, though, there, there doesn’t seem to be an explanation for what these pilots had seen. So I will keep you updated. And thanks for watching.
As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.
